TD 899 
. R26 
T43 
2002 


COPY 1 































United States 
Environmental Protection 
Ml M % Agency 


Technical Approaches to 
Characterizing and Cleaning up 
Brownfields Sites: 

Railroad Yards 

Site Profile 























EPA/625/R-02/007 
July 2002 



Technical Approaches to 
Characterizing and Cleaning up 

Brownfields Sites: 


Railroad Yards 


Site Profile 
7/15/02 


Technology Transfer and Support Division 
National Risk Management Research 

Laboratory 

Office of Research and Development 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 
Cincinnati, OH 45268 



Recycled/Recyclable 
Printed with vegetable-based ink on 
paper that contains a minimum ot 
50% post-consumer fiber content 
processed chlorine tree. 


Notice 


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through its Office of 
Research and Development funded and managed the research 
described here under Contract No. 68-C7-0011 to Science 
Applications International Corporation (SAIC). It has been 
subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review and has 
been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of 
trade names or commercial products does not constitute 
endorsement or recommendation for use. 


I 



LC Control Number 



2002 485731 


ii 


CH, */ e? 










Foreword 


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is charged by Congress with protecting the Nation’s 
land, air, and water resources. Under a mandate of national environmental laws, the Agency 
strives to formulate and implement actions leading to a compatible balance between human 
activities and the ability of natural systems to support and nurture life. To meet this mandate, 
EPA’s research program is providing data and technical support for solving environmental 
problems today and building a science knowledge base necessary to manage our ecological 
resources wisely, understand how pollutants affect our health, and prevent or reduce risks in the 
future. 

The National Risk Management Research Laboratory is the Agency’s center for investigation of 
technological and management approaches for reducing risks from threats to human health and 
the environment. The focus of the Laboratory’s research program is on methods for the 
prevention and control of pollution to air, land, water, and subsurface resources; protection of 
water quality in public water systems, remediation of contaminated sites and groundwater; and 
prevention and control of indoor air pollution. The goal of this research is to catalyze 
development and implementation of innovative, cost-effective environmental technologies; 
develop scientific and engineering information needed by EPA to support regulatory and policy 
decisions; and provide technical support and information transfer to ensure effective 
implementation of environmental regulations and strategies. 

This publication has been produced as part of the Laboratory’s strategic long-term research plan. 
It is published and made available by EPA’s Office of Research and Development to assist the 
user community and to link researchers with their clients. 


E. Timothy Oppelt, Director 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory 


111 


Acknowledgments 


This document was prepared by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) for the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s National Risk Management Research Laboratory 
Technology Transfer and Support Division (TTSD) in the Office of Research and Development. 
Susan Schock of TTSD served as Work Assignment Manager. Tena Meadows O’Rear served as 
SAIC’s Project Manager. Participating in this effort were Arvin Wu, Joel Wolf, and Karyn Sper. 
Reviewers included Jan Brodmerkl of the USACE in Wilmington, NC, Margaret Aycock of the 
Gulf Coast Hazardous Substance Research Center at Lamar University in Beaumont Texas, 
Alison Benjamin of Southwest Detroit Environmental Vision, Detroit, Michigan, and from the 
Association of State and Territorial Solid Waste Management Officials (ASTSWMO). 

Appreciation is given to EPA’s Office of Special Programs for guidance on the Brownfields 
Initiative. 


IV 


Contents 


Notice.ii 

Foreword .iii 

Acknowledgments.iv 

Contents.v 

Chapter 1. Introduction.1 

Background .1 

Purpose.1 

Chapter 2. Railroad Yard Brownfields.4 

Railyard Activities .4 

Contaminants Found at Railyards .5 

Railyard Site Remediation .5 

Chapter 3. Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence .7 

Background Information.7 

Role of EPA and State Government.8 

Performing a Phase I Site Assessment.9 

Due Diligence. 13 

Conclusion .17 

Chapter 4. Phase II Site Investigation.19 

Background.19 

Setting Data Quality Objectives.21 

Establish Screening Levels.21 

Conduct Environmental Sampling and Data Analysis.22 

Chapter 5. Contaminant Management.25 

Background.25 

Evaluate Remedial Alternatives.26 

Develop Remedy Implementation Plan .26 

Remedy Implementation.28 

Chapter 6. Conclusion.30 

Appendix A. Acronyms .31 

Appendix B. Glossary.33 

Appendix C. Testing Technologies.45 

Appendix D. Cleanup Technologies.51 

Appendix E. Works Cited.71 


v 




























































































































































































































Chapter 1 
Introduction 


Background 

Many communities across the country have 
brownfields sites, which the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency (EPA) defines as abandoned, 
idle, and under-used industrial and commercial 
facilities where expansion or redevelopment is 
complicated by real or perceived environmental 
contamination. Concerns about liability, cost, and 
potential health risks associated with brownfields 
sites may prompt businesses to migrate to 
"greenfields" outside the city. Left behind are 
communities burdened with environmental 
contamination, declining property values, and 
increased unemployment. The EPA established the 
Brownfields Economic Redevelopment Initiative 
to enable states, site planners, and other 
community stakeholders to work together in a 
timely manner to prevent, assess, safely clean up, 
and sustainably reuse brownfields sites. 

The cornerstone of EPA's Brownfields Initiative is 
the Brownfields Pilot Program. Under this 
program, EPA is funding more than 200 
brownfields assessment pilot projects in states, 
cities, towns, counties, and tribal lands across the 
country. The pilots, each funded at up to $200,000 
over two years, are bringing together community 
groups, investors, lenders, developers, and other 
affected parties to address the issues associated 
with assessing and cleaning up contaminated 
brownfields sites and returning them to 
appropriate, productive use. In addition to the 
hundreds of brownfields sites being addressed by 
these pilots, many states have established 
voluntary cleanup programs to encourage 
municipalities and private sector organizations to 
assess, clean up, and redevelop brownfields sites. 
The EPA has a website where information on 
brownfields redevelopment can be found. The 
address is www.epa.gov/brownfields. 

Purpose 

EPA has developed a set of technical guides, 
including this document, to assist communities, 
states, municipalities, and the private sector to 


better address brownfields sites. Currently, six 
guides in the series are available: 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and 
Cleaning up Iron and Steel Mill Sites under 
the Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/007, 
December 1998. 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and 
Cleaning up Automotive Repair Sites under 
the Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/008, 
December 1999. 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and 
Cleaning Metal Finishing Sites under the 
Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-98/006, 
December 1999. 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and 
Cleaning up Brownfields Sites, EPA/625/R- 
00/009, December 2000. 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterization 
and Cleanup of Automotive Recycling 
Brownfields, EPA/625/R-02/001, January 
2001. 

^ Technical Approaches to Characterizing and 
Redeveloping Brownfields: Municipal 
Landfills and Illegal Dumps, EPA/625/R- 
02/002, January 2002. 

These guides are comprehensive documents that 
cover the key steps to redeveloping brownfields 
sites for their respective industrial sector. In 
addition, a supplementary guide contains 
information on cost-estimating tools and resources 
for brownfields sites ( Cost Estimating Tools and 
Resources for Addressing Sites Under the 
Brownfields Initiative, EPA/625/R-99/001, 
January 1999). 

EPA developed a general guide (listed above) to 
provide decision makers with a better 
understanding of the common technical issues 
involved in assessing and cleaning up brownfields 
sites. This industry specific profile supplements 
that general guide. 


1 



Select Brownfield Site 

1 

Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence 

Obtain background information of site to determine extent of contamination and 
legal and financial risks 

► If there appears to be no contamination, begin redevelopment activities 

► If there is high level of contamination, reassess the viability ofproject 

■ Chapter 3 

y 

Phase II Site Investigation 

Sample the site to identify the type, quantity, and extent of the contamination 

► If the contamination does not pose health or environmental risk, begin 
redevelopment activities 

► If there is high level of contamination, reassess the viability ofproject 

I Chapter 4 

▼ 

Evaluate Remedial Options 

Compile and assess possible remedial alternatives 

► If the remedial alternatives do not appear to be feasible, determine 
whether redevelopment is a viable option 

I Chapter 5 

y 

Develop Remedy Implementation Plan 

Coordinate with stakeholders to design a remedy implementation plan 

• Chapter 5 

y 

Remedy Implementation 

► If additional contamination is discovered during the remedy 

implementation process, return to the site assessment phase to determine 
the extent of the contamination 

• Chapter 5 

y 

Begin Redevelopment Activities 


Exhibit 1-1. Flow Chart of the Brownfields Redevelopment Process 


2 




































Typical Brownfield Redevelopment Process 

The typical brownfields redevelopment process 
begins with a Phase I site assessment and due 
diligence, as shown in Exhibit 1-1. The site 
assessment and due diligence process provides 
an initial screening to determine the extent of the 
contamination and possible legal and financial 
risks. If the site assessment and due diligence 
process reveals no apparent contamination and 
no significant health or environmental risks, 
redevelopment activities may begin 
immediately. If the site seems to contain 
unacceptably high levels of contamination, a 
reassessment of the project’s viability may be 
appropriate. 

A Phase II site investigation samples the site to 
provide a comprehensive understanding of the 
contamination. If this investigation reveals no 
significant sources of contamination, 
redevelopment activities may commence. 
Again, if the sampling reveals unacceptably high 
levels of contamination, the viability of the 
project should be reassessed. 

Should the Phase II site investigation reveal a 
manageable level of contamination, the next step 
is to evaluate possible remedial alternatives. If 
no feasible remedial alternatives are found, the 
project viability would have to be reassessed. 
Otherwise, the next step would be to select an 
appropriate remedy and develop a remedy 
implementation plan. Following remedy 
implementation, if additional contamination is 
discovered, the entire process is repeated. 


Organization of this Document 

This document is organized as follows: 

^ Chapter 2 - Railroad Yard Brownfields 
^ Chapter 3 - Phase I Site Assessment and 
Due Diligence 

^ Chapter 4 - Phase II Site Investigation 
Chapter 5 - Contaminant Management 
Chapter 6 - Conclusion 
^ Appendix A - Acronyms 
^ Appendix B - Glossary 
^ Appendix C - Testing Technologies 
Appendix D - Cleanup Technologies 
^ Appendix E - Works Cited 


3 


Chapter 2 

Railroad Yard Brownfields 


On February 28, 1827, the State of Maryland 
chartered the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad. 
This was the beginning of the nation’s rail system. 
Since then, the railroad industry has laid over 
300,000 miles of railroad track, connecting almost 
every locale, rural or urban, throughout the United 
States. When railroad lines meet industrial areas, 
railroad yards result. Railroad yards are areas 
where railcars and locomotives are maintained, 
stored, and coupled to form trains. Rail yards are 
in effect the “garage” of rail lines, a central 
location in a region where railroad companies can 
work on their rolling stock and dispatch trains to 
locations around the country. Almost any large 
town or city, especially ones with industry, are 
likely to have a rail yard of some size. The 
smallest ones can be as simple as track sidings 
where rail cars can be stored until needed, while 
the largest ones can be in the hundreds of acres. 
(EPA 1997). 

Today, railroads are experiencing a decline, as 
trucks out-compete railroads for freight traffic. As 
a result, more and more rail yards are laying 
unused or closed. These rail yards many times 
qualify as “brownfields”. 

This section discusses railroad yards, the typical 
types of contaminants that can be found at a site, 
and possible remediation strategies. 

Railyard Activities 

A wide variety of activities take place at a railroad 
yard that can result in environmental problems. 
These activities can be broken down into roughly 
four areas (EPA August, 1999). These areas are: 

^ Locomotive maintenance 
^ Railcar refurbishing and maintenance 
Track maintenance 
5 s " Transportation operations 


Locomotive Maintenance 

There are numerous activities associated with 
locomotive maintenance that can result in 
environmental problems. Activities that may 
have contributed contaminants to the area in 
the past are: changing oil and oil filters, 
painting and paint stripping, hydraulic system 
repair, locomotive coolant disposal, metal 
machining, used battery disposal and general 
cleaning of engine parts and the locomotive 
car (EPA 1997). Asbestos can be present from 
the insulation around the boilers of steam 
locomotives, old structures, or from old brake 
shoes that were not properly disposed of. 
Brake repair, large- and small-scale equipment 
cleaning, and metal machining can be part of 
maintenance. Each of these activities can 
contribute to environmental problems. 

^ Railcar Refurbishing and Maintenance 

Railcar refurbishing and maintenance consist 
of cleaning the interiors and exteriors of the 
railcars, stripping and painting the railcars, 
and other maintenance such as brake and 
wheel set repair (EPA 1997). Environmental 
problems can result from all these activities. 
In addition, anything that the railcars carry or 
pass over (i.e., creosote) may wash off and 
contaminate the surrounding soil or water. 

Refurbishing railcars entails the removal of 
old paint and the application of new paint. 
Both of these activities can result in soil or 
water contamination. The paint removal 
process can result in paint chips and grit. 
These chips and grit can cause soil or water 
contamination. When the new paint is applied 
there is also the chance that some of the new 
paint could end up in the surrounding soil or 
water. Exhibit 2-1 lists the processes, material 
inputs and wastes associated with railcar 
refurbishing and maintenance. 


4 


^ Track Maintenance 

Environmental problems from track 
maintenance can result from two areas. First, 
the wood ties are treated with a wood 
preserver such as creosote, which can leach 
into the soil and groundwater. Second, the 
gravel and stone mixtures upon which the 
tracks are built usually contain heavy metals. 
These heavy metals tend to be from the stone 
mixture or “slag”, which is often the residual 
left over from copper mining. These can also 
leach into surrounding soil and groundwater 
(EPA 1999). 

Transportation Operations 

Transportation operations can create 
environmental problems from three areas: 
fueling, hazardous material transport, and oil 
and coolant release during transport (EPA 
1997). With fuel operations there can be 
spillage or fuel leakages. It is also important 
to determine if the fuel storage tanks and 
piping were above ground or below ground If 
the tanks and piping were below ground there 
could be an increased chance of groundwater 
contamination. 

Associated Industrial Activities 

Other industries, such as tank car cleaning, 
have frequently grown up around the rail 
industry. There may be contamination from 
these kinds of activities. Also, while 
hazardous wastes from the site are usually 
drummed and shipped off site, there may be 
unidentified waste-containing drums left at the 
site. Therefore, the areas and buildings 
surrounding the railyard may need to be 
considered. 


Contaminants Found at Railyards 

Various types of contaminants can result from the 
railroad yard operations described above. Each 
contaminant is a risk to both soil and groundwater 
quality. 

Contaminants resulting from locomotive and 
engine maintenance are degreasing solvents, 
PCBS (poly-chlorinated biphenyls), and heavy 
metals. Solvents and heavy metal-based paints 
can be found in the area surrounding railcar 
refurbishing and maintenance operations. Further 
environmental problems can result from creosote 
and Pentachlorophenol (PCP) from the rail ties. 
The “slag” base for the railroad ties can contribute 
to heavy-metal contamination. Finally, 
contamination from the transportation operations 
can be from diesel fuel associated with fueling as 
well as possible contamination from spillage or 
leakage of hazardous cargo during transport. 


Typical Contaminants Found at 

a Railroad Yard 

• 

Petroleum Hydrocarbons 

• 

waste acids and alkalies 

• 

paints contaminated with 
heavy metals 

• 

VOCs 

• 

BTEX 

• 

Solvents and paint thinners 

• 

Fuels 

• 

Oil and grease 

• 

Lead 

• 

PCBs 

• 

used coolants 


“Guide to Contaminants Found at Typical 
Brownfields Sites, Appendix A.” Undated. 
http://clu- 

in.orq/PRODUCTS/ROADMAP/appenda.htm. 

Exhibit 2-1. Typical Railyard Contaminants 


Railyard Site Remediation 


5 






Remediation of railyards depends, as with any 
other brownfield, on the contaminants present, 
their concentration, and the media they are 
affecting (soil or water). In addition, selecting a 
remediation strategy also involves an in-depth 
analysis of the costs associated with development. 
For ease of discussion, we will group the 
remediation strategies by media to be treated. 

Soil Remediation 

There are two major classes of soil remediation; ex 
situ, where soil is removed off site for treatment, 
and in situ, where soil is treated on site. For the 
most part, any technique that is performed on site 
can be performed off site, and vice-versa. Some 
soil treatment techniques include: 

► Bioremediation 

This remediation strategy involves using 
microorganisms such as bacteria, yeast, or 
fungi to break down hazardous substances to 
less-toxic or non-toxic substances. 

► Phytoremediation 

For sites where it is appropriate, 
phytoremediation may be used both to remove 
contaminants and to establish greater 
confidence on the part of the community. 

► Thermal Desorption 

Thermal desorption is a remediation technique 
that can be performed on contaminated soils, 
both in-situ and ex-situ. In this process, soils 
are heated to temperatures up to 1000°F to 
break down and destroy contaminants. The 
volatilized contaminants are then collected and 
treated by a registered waste disposal facility. 
This treatment technology works best on 
compounds with high VOCs and PAHs. 


► Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) 


In this remediation technique the soil is 
usually excavated and moved ex-situ, but it 
can sometimes be treated in-situ. The method 
involves exerting a vacuum through the soil 
formation to extract vapors. It is especially 
valuable for treating soils with high levels of 
VOCs and SVOCs. 

Groundwater Remediation 

► Treatment Walls 

This passive remediation strategy is very 
popular at sites where the hazard is not acute 
(thus not warranting more expensive methods) 
but where groundwater contamination needs to 
be contained. Construction involves 
excavating a trench perpendicular to the 
direction of groundwater flow and installing a 
wall made of a material with the ability to 
absorb contaminants while letting water flow 
through naturally. This strategy is only for 
contaminated groundwater. 

► Groundwater Extraction/Injection 

This method of treating contaminated 
groundwater involves drilling numerous wells 
into and around contaminated groundwater. 
Once completed, the wells can extract 
contaminated water for treatment. Treated 
water is then reinjected into the aquifer. This 
method of treatment can take years to work, 
depending on the size of the aquifer, because 
groundwater withdrawal/injection rates must 
be monitored closely so as not to cause ground 
subsidence or other hydrogeological problems. 
This technique can be used to treat most 
groundwater problems, including heavy metal 
and VOC contamination. 

Each site will have a unique set of contaminants 
and those contaminants will be present in unique 
concentrations. Successful remediation depends on 
the ability of the developers to create unique 
treatment plans for that site, while observing any 
economic constraints. 


6 


Chapter 3 

Phase I Site Assessment and Due Diligence 


Background Information 

This portion of the guide is more general and is 
put here in case a user does not have the general 
document. Each portion of the information is 
relevant to railroad yards, and should be 
considered in their redevelopment. 

Site assessment and due diligence provide initial 
information regarding the feasibility of a 
brownfields redevelopment project. A site 
assessment evaluates the health and 
environmental risks of a site and the due 
diligence process examines the legal and 
financial risks. These two assessments help the 
planner build a conceptual framework of the site, 
which will develop into the foundation for the 
next steps in the redevelopment process. 

Site assessment and due diligence are necessary 
to fully address issues regarding the 
environmental liabilities associated with property 
ownership. Several federal and state programs 
exist to minimize owner liability at brownfields 
sites and facilitate cleanup and redevelopment. 
Planners and decision makers should contact 
their state environmental or regional EPA office 
for further information. 

The Phase 1 site assessment is generally 
performed by an environmental professional. 
Cost for this service depends upon size and 
location of the site, and is usually around $2,500. 
A site assessment typically identifies: 



Due diligence typically identifies: 


► Potential contaminants that remain in and 
around a site; 

► Likely pathways through which the 
contaminants may move; and 

► Potential risks to the environment and human 
health that exist along the migration pathways. 


► Potential legal and regulatory requirements 
and risks; 

► Preliminary cost estimates for property 
purchase, engineering, taxation and risk 
management; and 

► Market viability of redevelopment project. 


7 


This chapter begins with background information 
on the role of the EPA and state government in 
brownfields redevelopment. The remainder of the 







chapter provides a description of the components 
of site assessment and the due diligence process. 

Role of EPA and State Government 

A brownfields redevelopment project is a 
partnership between planners and decision makers 
(both in the private and public sector), state and 
local officials, and the local community. State 
environmental agencies are often key decision 
makers and a primary source of information for 
brownfields projects. In most cases, planners and 
decision-makers need to work closely with state 
program managers to determine their particular 
state's requirements for brownfields development. 
Planners may also need to meet additional federal 
requirements. While state roles in brownfields 
programs vary widely, key state functions include: 

► Overseeing the brownfields site assessment 
and cleanup process, including the 
management of voluntary cleanup programs; 

► Providing guidance on contaminant screening 
levels; and 

► Serving as a source of site information, as well 
as legal and technical guidance. 

The EPA works closely with state and local 
governments to develop state Voluntary Cleanup 
Programs (VCP) to encourage, assist, and expedite 
brownfields redevelopment. The purpose of a state 
VCP is to streamline brownfields redevelopment, 
reduce transaction costs, and provide liability 
protection for past contamination. Planners and 
decision-makers should be aware that state 
cleanup requirements vary significantly; 
brownfields managers from state agencies should 
be able to clarify how their state requirements 
relate to federal requirements. 

EPA encourages all states to have their VCPs 
approved via a Memorandum of Agreement 
(MOA) whereby EPA transfers control over a 
brownfields site to that state (Federal Register 
97-23831). Under such an arrangement, the EPA 
does not anticipate becoming involved with 
private cleanup efforts that are approved by 
federally recognized state VCPs (unless the 
agency determines that a given cleanup poses an 
imminent and substantial threat to public health, 


welfare or the environment). EPA may, however, 

provide states with technical assistance to support 

state VCP efforts. 

To receive federal certification, state VCPs must: 

Provide for meaningful community 
involvement. This requirement is intended to 
ensure that the public is informed of and, if 
interested, involved in brownfields planning. 
While states have discretion regarding how 
they provide such opportunities, at a minimum 
they must notify the public of a proposed 
contaminant management plan by directly 
contacting local governments and community 
groups and publishing or airing legal notices 
in local media. 

Ensure that voluntary response actions 
protect human health and the environment. 

Examples of ways to determine protectiveness 
include: conducting site-specific risk 
assessments to determine background 
contaminant concentrations; determining 
maximum contaminant levels for groundwater; 
and determining the human health risk range 
for known or suspected carcinogens. Even if 
the state VCP does not require the state to 
monitor a site after approving the final 
voluntary contaminant management plan, the 
state may still reserve the right to revoke the 
cleanup certification if there is an 
unsatisfactory change in the site's use or 
additional contamination is discovered. 

^ Provide resources needed to ensure that 
voluntary response actions are conducted in 
an appropriate and timely manner. State 
VCPs must have adequate financial, legal, and 
technical resources to ensure that voluntary 
cleanups meet these goals. Most state VCPs 
are intended to be self-sustaining. Generally, 
state VCPs obtain their funding in one of two 
ways: planners pay an hourly oversight charge 
to the state environmental agency, in addition 
to all cleanup costs; or planners pay an 
application fee that can be applied against 
oversight costs. 


8 


^ Provide mechanisms for the written 
approval of voluntary response action plans 

and certify the completion of the response in 
writing for submission to the EPA and the 
voluntary party. 

^ Ensure safe completion of voluntary 
response actions through oversight and 
enforcement of the cleanup process. 

^ Oversee the completion of the cleanup and 
long-term site monitoring. In the event that 
the use of the site changes or is found to have 
additional contamination, states must 
demonstrate their ability to enforce cleanup 
efforts via the removal of cleanup certification 
or other means. 

Performing a Phase I Site Assessment 

The purpose of a Phase I site assessment is to 
identify the type, quantity, and extent of potential 
contamination at a brownfields site. Financial 
institutions typically require a site assessment 
prior to lending money to potential property 
buyers to protect the institution's role as mortgage 
holder. In addition, parties involved in the transfer, 
foreclosure, leasing, or marketing of properties 
recommend some form of site evaluation. A site 
investigation should include: 1 

^ A review of readily available records, such as 
former site use, building plans, records of any 
prior contamination events; 

A site visit to observe the areas used for 
various industrial processes and the condition 
of the property; 

Interviews with knowledgeable people, such 
as site owners, operators, and occupants; 
neighbors; local government officials; and 
>* A report that includes an assessment of the 
likelihood that contaminants are present at the 
site. 


The elements of a site assessment presented here 
are based in part on ASTM Standards 1527 and 1528. 


A site assessment should be conducted by an 
environmental professional, and may take three to 
four weeks to complete. Information on how to 
review records, conduct site visits and interviews, 
and develop a report during a site assessment is 
provided below. 

Review Records 

A review of readily available records helps 
identify likely contaminants and their locations. 
This review provides a general overview of the 
brownfields site, likely contaminant pathways, and 
related health and environmental concerns. 

Facility Information 

Facility records are often the best source of 
information on former site activities. If past 
owners are not initially known, a local records 
office should have deed books that contain 
ownership history. Generally, records pertaining 
specifically to the site in question are adequate for 
site assessment review purposes. In some cases, 
however, records of adjacent properties may also 
need to be reviewed to assess the possibility of 
contaminants migrating from or to the site, based 
on geologic or hydrogeologic conditions. If the 
brownfields property resides in a low-lying area, 
in close proximity to other industrial facilities or 
formerly industrialized sites, or downgradient 
from current or former industrialized sites, an 
investigation of adjacent properties is warranted. 

In addition to facility records, American Society 
for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard 1527 
identifies other useful sources of information such 
as historical aerial photographs, fire insurance 
maps, property tax files, recorded land title 
records, topographic maps, local street directories, 
building department records, zoning/land use 
records, maps and newspaper archives (ASTM, 
1997). 

State and federal environmental offices are also 
potential sources of information. These offices 
may provide information such as facility maps that 
identify activities and disposal areas, lists of 
stored pollutants, and the types and levels of 


9 



pollutants released. State and federal offices may 

provide the following types of facility level data: 

^ The state offices responsible for industrial 
waste management and hazardous waste 
should have a record of any emergency 
removal actions at the site (e.g., the removal of 
leaking drums that posed an "imminent threat" 
to local residents); any Resource Conservation 
and Recovery Act (RCRA) permits issued at 
the site; notices of violations issued; and any 
environmental investigations. 

^ The state office responsible for discharges of 
wastewater to water bodies under the National 
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 
(NPDES) program will have a record of any 
permits issued for discharges into surface 
water at or near the site. The local publicly 
owned treatment works (POTW) will have 
records for permits issued for indirect 
discharges into sewers (e.g., floor drain 
discharges into sanitary drains). 

^ The state office responsible for underground 
storage tanks may also have records of tanks 
located at the site, as well as records of any 
past releases. 

^ The state office responsible for air emissions 
may be able to provide information on 
potential air pollutants associated with 
particular types of onsite contamination. 

EPA's Comprehensive Environmental 
Response, Compensation, and Liability 
Information System (CERCLIS) of potentially 
contaminated sites should have a record of any 
previously reported contamination at or near 
the site. For information, contact the 
Superfund Hotline (800-424-9346). 

^ EPA Regional Offices can provide records of 
sites that have released hazardous substances. 
Information is available from the Federal 
National Priorities List (NPL); lists of 
treatment, storage, and disposal (TSD) 
facilities subject to corrective action under the 
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 


(RCRA); RCRA generators; and the 
Emergency Response Notification System 
(ERNS). Contact EPA Regional Offices for 
more information. 

State environmental records and local library 
archives may indicate permit violations or 
significant contamination releases from or 
near the site. 

^ Residents who were former employees may be 
able to provide information on waste 
management practices. These reports should 
be substantiated. 

Local fire departments may have responded to 
emergency events at the facility. Fire 
departments or city halls may have fire 
insurance maps 2 or other historical maps or 
data that indicate the location of hazardous 
waste storage areas at the site. 

Local waste haulers may have records of the 
facility's disposal of hazardous or other 
wastes. 

^ Utility records. 

Local building permits. 

Requests for federal regulatory information are 
governed by the Freedom of Information Act 
(FOIA), and the fulfilling of such requests 
generally takes a minimum of four to eight weeks. 
Similar freedom of information legislation does 
not uniformly exist on the state level; one can 
expect a minimum waiting period of four weeks to 
receive requested information (ASTM, 1997). 

Identifying Contaminant Migration Pathways 

Off site migration of contaminants may pose a risk 
to human health and the environment. A site 


Fire insurance maps show, for a specific 
property, the locations of such items as UST’s, buildings, and 
areas where chemicals have been used for certain industrial 
processes. 


10 



assessment should gather as much readily 
available information on the physical 
characteristics of the site as possible. Migration 
pathways, such as soil, groundwater, and air, 
depend on site-specific characteristics such as 
geology and the physical characteristics of the 
individual contaminants (e.g., mobility, solubility, 
and density). Information on the physical 
characteristics of the general area can play an 
important role in identifying potential migration 
pathways and focusing environmental sampling 
activities, if needed. 

Topographic, soil and subsurface, and 
groundwater data are particularly important: 

Topographic Data. Topographic information 
helps determine whether the site may be subject to 
contamination from or the source of contamination 
to adjoining properties. Topographic information 
will help identify low-lying areas of the facility 
where rain and snowmelt (and any contaminants in 
them) may collect and contribute both water and 
contaminants to the underlying aquifer or surface 
runoff to nearby areas. The U.S. Geological 
Survey (USGS) of the Department of the Interior 
has topographic maps for nearly every part of the 
country. These maps are inexpensive and available 
through the following address: 

USGS Information Services 
Box 25286 
Denver, CO 80225 

l~ http://www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/to order.hmtll 

Local USGS offices may also have topographic 
maps. 

Soil and Subsurface Data. Soil and subsurface 
soil characteristics determine how contaminants 
move in the environment. For example, clay soils 
limit downward movement of pollutants into 
underlying groundwater but facilitate surface 
runoff. Sandy soils, on the other hand, can 
promote rapid infiltration into the water table 
while inhibiting surface runoff. Soil information 
can be obtained through a number of sources: 


^ The Natural Resource Conservation Service 
and Cooperative Extension Service offices of 
the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
are also likely to have soil maps. 

^ Local planning agencies should have soil 
maps to support land use planning activities. 
These maps provide a general description of 
the soil types present within a county (or 
sometimes a smaller administrative unit, such 
as a township). 

^ Well-water companies are likely to be familiar 
with local subsurface conditions, and local 
water districts and state water divisions may 
have well-logging and water testing 
information. 

^ Local health departments may be familiar with 
subsurface conditions because of their interest 
in septic drain fields. 

Local construction contractors are likely to be 
familiar with subsurface conditions from their 
work with foundations. 

Soil characteristics can vary widely within a 
relatively small area, and it is common to find that 
the top layer of soil in urban areas is composed of 
fill materials, not native soils. Geotechnical 
survey reports are often required by local 
authorities prior to construction. While the 
purpose of such surveys is to test soils for 
compaction, bedrock, and water table, general 
information gleaned from such reports can support 
the environmental site assessment process. 
Though local soil maps and other general soil 
information can be used for screening purposes 
such as in a site assessment, site-specific 
information will be needed in the event that 
cleanup is necessary. 

Groundwater Data. Planners should obtain general 
groundwater information about the site area, 
including: 

^ State classifications of underlying aquifers; 

^ Depth to the groundwater tables; 

^ Groundwater flow direction and rate; 

^ Location of nearby drinking water and 
agricultural wells; and 

Groundwater recharge zones in the vicinity of 
the site. 


11 



This information can be obtained from several 
local sources, including water authorities, well¬ 
drilling companies, health departments, and 
Agricultural Extension and Natural Resource 
Conservation Service offices. 

Identifying Potential Environmental and Human 
Health Concerns 

Identifying possible environmental and human 
health risks early in the process can influence 
decisions regarding the viability of a site for 
cleanup and the choice of cleanup methods used. 
A visual inspection of the area will usually suffice 
to identify onsite or nearby wetlands and water 
bodies that may be particularly sensitive to 
releases of contaminants during characterization or 
cleanup activities. Planners should also review 
available information from state and local 
environmental agencies to ascertain the proximity 
of residential dwellings, industrial/commercial 
activities, or wetlands/water bodies, and to identify 
people, animals, or plants that might receive 
migrating contamination; any particularly sensitive 
populations in the area (e.g., children; endangered 
species); and whether any major contamination 
events have occurred previously in the area (e.g., 
drinking water problems; groundwater 
contamination). 

Such general environmental information may be 
obtained by contacting the U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers, state environmental agencies, local 
planning and conservation authorities, the U.S. 
Geological Survey, and the USDA Natural 
Resource Conservation Service. State and local 
agencies and organizations can usually provide 
information on local fauna and the habitats of any 
sensitive and/or endangered species. 

For human health information, planners can 
contact: 

^ State and local health assessment 
organizations. Organizations such as health 
departments, should have data on the quality 
of local well water used as a drinking water 
source, as well as any human health risk 
studies that have been conducted. In addition, 


these groups may have other relevant 
information, such as how certain types of 
contaminants might pose a health risk during 
site characterization. Information on exposures 
to particular contaminants and associated 
health risks can also be found in health profile 
documents developed by the Agency for Toxic 
Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR). In 
addition, ATSDR may have conducted a 
health consultation or health assessment in the 
area if an environmental contamination event 
occurred in the past. Such an event and 
assessment should have been identified in the 
site assessment records review of prior 
contamination incidents at the site. For 
information, contact ATSDR's Division of 
Toxicology (404-639-6300). 

^ Local water and health departments. During 
the site visit (described below), when visually 
inspecting the area around the facility, 
planners should identify any residential 
dwellings or commercial activities near the 
facility and evaluate whether people there may 
come into contact with contamination along 
one of the migration pathways. Where 
groundwater contamination may pose a 
problem, planners should identify any nearby 
waterways or aquifers that may be impacted 
by groundwater discharge of contaminated 
water, including any drinking water wells 
downgradient of the site, such as a municipal 
well field. Local water departments will have a 
count of well connections to the public water 
supply. Planners should also pay particular 
attention to information on private wells in the 
area downgradient of the facility because they 
may be vulnerable to contaminants migrating 
offsite even when the public municipal 
drinking water supply is not vulnerable. Local 
health departments often have information on 
the locations of private wells. 

Both groundwater pathways and surface water 
pathways should be evaluated because 
contaminants in groundwater can eventually 
migrate to surface waters and contaminants in 
surface waters can migrate to groundwater. 


12 


Conducting a Site Visit 

In addition to collecting and reviewing available 
records, a site visit can provide important 
information about the uses and conditions of the 
property and identify areas that warrant further 
investigation (ASTM, 1997). During a visual 
inspection, the following should be noted: 

Current or past uses of abutting properties that 
may affect the property being evaluated; 
Evidence of hazardous substances migrating 
on site or off site; 

^ Odors; 

> Wells; 

^ Pits, ponds, or lagoons; 

^ Surface pools of liquids; 

^ Drums or storage containers; 

^ Stained soil or pavements; 

^ Corrosion; 

Stressed vegetation; 

^ Solid waste; 

^ Drains, sewers, sumps, or pathways for off¬ 
site migration; and 

Roads, water supplies, and sewage systems. 

Conducting Interviews 

Interviewing the site owner, site occupants, and 
local officials can help identify and clarify the 
prior and current uses and conditions of the 
property. They may also provide information on 
other documents or references regarding the 
property. Such documents include environmental 
audit reports, environmental permits, registrations 
for storage tanks, material safety data sheets, 
community right-to-know plans, safety plans, 
government agency notices or correspondence, 
hazardous waste generator reports or notices, 
geotechnical studies, or any proceedings involving 
the property (ASTM, 1997). Personnel from the 
following local government agencies should be 
interviewed: the fire department, health agency, 
and the agency with authority for hazardous waste 
disposal or other environmental matters. 
Interviews can be conducted in person, by 
telephone, or in writing. 

ASTM Standard 1528 provides a questionnaire 
that may be appropriate for use in interviews for 
certain sites. ASTM suggests that this 


questionnaire be posed to the current property 
owner, any major occupant of the property (or at 
least 10 percent of the occupants of the property if 
no major occupant exists), or "any occupant likely 
to be using, treating, generating, storing, or 
disposing of hazardous substances or petroleum 
products on or from the property" (ASTM, 1996). 
A user's guide accompanies the ASTM 
questionnaire to assist the investigator in 
conducting interviews, as well as researching 
records and making site visits. 

Developing a Report 

Toward the end of the site assessment, planners 
should develop a report that includes all of the 
important information obtained during record 
reviews, the site visit, and interviews. 
Documentation, such as references and important 
exhibits, should be included, as well as the 
credentials of the environmental professional who 
conducted the environmental site assessment. The 
report should include all information regarding the 
presence or likely presence of hazardous 
substances or petroleum products on the property 
and any conditions that indicate an existing, past, 
or potential release of such substances into 
property structures or into the ground, 
groundwater, or surface water of the property 
(ASTM, 1997). The report should include the 
environmental professional's opinion of the impact 
of the presence or likely presence of any 
contaminants, and a findings and conclusion 
section that either indicates that the environmental 
site assessment revealed no evidence of 
contaminants in connection with the property, or 
discusses what evidence of contamination was 
found (ASTM, 1997). 

Additional sections of the report might include a 
recommendations section for a site investigation, 
if appropriate. Some states or financial institutions 
may require information on specific substances 
such as lead in drinking water or asbestos. 

Due Diligence 

The purpose of the due diligence process is to 
determine the financial viability and extent of 
legal risk related to a particular brownfields 


13 


project. The concept of financial viability can be 
explored from two perspectives, the marketability 
of the intended redevelopment use and the 
accuracy of the financial analysis for 
redevelopment work. Legal risk is determined 
through a legal liability analysis. Exhibit 3-2 
represents the three-stage due diligence process. 

Market Analysis 

To gain an understanding of the marketability of 
any given project, it is critical to relate envisioned 
use(s) of a redeveloped brownfields site to the 
state and local communities in which it is located. 
Knowing the role of the projected use of the 
redevelopment project in the larger picture of 
economic and social trends helps the planner 
determine the likelihood of the project’s success. 
For example, many metropolitan areas are 
adopting a profile of economic activity that 
parallels the profile of the Detroit area dominated 
by the auto manufacturing industry. New York, 
Northern Virginia and Washington, for example, 
are becoming known as telecommunications hubs 
(.Brownfields Redevelopment: A Guidebook for 
Local Governments & Communities, International 
City/County Management Association, 1997). 
Ohio is asserting itself as a plastics research and 
development center, and even smaller 
communities, such as Frederick, Maryland, a 
growing center for biomedical research and 
technology are marketing themselves with a 
specific economic niche in mind. 

The benefits of co-locating similar and/or 
complementary business activities can be seen in 
business and industrial parks, where collaboration 
occurs in such areas as facility use, joint business 
ventures, employee support services such as on¬ 
site childcare, waste recycling and disposal, and 
others. For the brownfields redevelopment 
planner, this contextual information provides 
opportunities for creative thinking and direction 
for collaborative planning related to various 
possible uses for a particular site and their 
likelihood of success. 

The long-term zoning plan of the jurisdiction in 
which the brownfields site is located provides an 
important source of information. Location of 


existing and planned transportation systems is a 
key question for any redevelopment activity. 
Observing the site’s proximity to other amenities 
will flesh out the picture of the attraction potential 
for any given use. 

Assessing the historic characteristics of the site 
that may influence the project is an important 
consideration at the neighborhood level. Gaining 
an understanding of the historic significance of a 
particular building might lead the community 
developer toward rehabilitation, rather than new 
construction on the site. Sensitivity regarding 
local affinities toward existing structures can go 
far to win a community’s support of a 
redevelopment project. 

Understanding what exists and what is planned 
provides part of the marketability picture. 
Particularly for smaller brownfields projects, 
knowing what is missing from the local 
community fabric can be an equally important 
aspect of the market analysis. Whether the “hub” 
of the area’s economic life is light industry or an 
office complex or a recreational facility, numerous 
other services are needed to support the fabric 
of community. 

Restaurants and delicatessens, for instance, 
complement many larger, more central attractions, 
as do many other retail, service and recreational 
endeavors. A survey of local residents will inform 
the planner of local needs. 

Financial Analysis 

The goal of a financial analysis is to assess the 
financial risks of the redevelopment project. A 
Phase I Site Assessment will give the planner 
some indication of the possible extent of 
environmental contamination to the site. Financial 
information continues to unfold with a Phase II 
Site Investigation. The process of establishing 
remedial goals and screening remedial alternatives 
requires an understanding of associated costs. 
Throughout these processes increasingly specific 
cost information informs the planner’s decision¬ 
making process. The planner’s financial analysis 
should, therefore, serve as an ongoing 
“conversation” with development plans, providing 


14 


an informed basis for the planner to determine 
whether or not to pursue the project. Ultimately 
the plan for remediation and use should contain as 
few financial unknowns as possible. 

While costs related to the environmental aspects of 
the project need to be considered throughout the 
process, other cost information is also critical, 
including the price of purchase and establishment 
of legal ownership of the site, planning costs, 
engineering and architectural costs, hurdling 
zoning issues, environmental consultation, 
taxation, infrastructure upgrades, and legal 
consultation and insurance to help mitigate and 
manage associated risks. 

In a property development initiative, where “time 
is money,” scheduling is a critical factor 
influencing the financial feasibility of any 
development project. The timeframe over which 
to project costs, the expected turnaround time for 
attaining necessary permit approvals, and the 
schedule for site assessment, site investigation and 
actual cleanup of the site, are some aspects of the 
overall schedule of the project. Throughout the 
life of the project, the questions: “how much will it 
cost” and “how long will it take” must be tracked 
as key interacting variables. 

Financing brownfields redevelopment projects 
presents unique difficulties. Many property 
transactions use the proposed purchase as 
collateral for financing, depending upon an 
appraiser’s estimate of the property’s current and 
projected value. In the case of a brownfields site, 
however, a lending institution is likely to hesitate 
or simply close the door on such an arrangement 
due to the uncertain value and limited resale 
potential of the property. Another problem that 
the developer may face in seeking financing is that 
banks fear the risk of additional contamination that 
might be discovered later in the development 
process, such as an underground plume of 
groundwater contamination that travels 
unexpectedly into a neighboring property. Finally, 
though recent legislative changes may soften these 
concerns, many banks fear that their connection 
with a brownfields project will put them in the 
“chain of title” and make them potentially liable 


for cleanup costs {Brownfields Redevelopment: A 
Guidebook for Local Governments & 
Communities, International City/County 
Management Association, 1997). 

A local appraiser can assist with estimation of 
property values before and after completion of the 
project, as well as evaluation of resale potential. 

Some of the more notable brownfields 
redevelopment successes have been financed 
through consortiums of lenders who agree to 
spread the risk. Public/private financing 
partnerships may also be organized to finance 
brownfields redevelopment through grants, loans, 
loan guarantees, or bonds. Examples of projects 
employing unique revenue streams, financing 
avenues, and tax incentives related to brownfields 
redevelopment are available in Lessons from the 
Field, Unlocking Economic Potential with an 


15 


Conduct Due Diligence 

Minimize the Legal and Financial Risk of a 
Brownfields Project 

Market Analysis 

Determine the market viability of the project by: 

► Developing and analyzing the community profile to assess 
public consensus for the market viability of the project 

► Identifying economic trends that may influence the project 
at various levels or scales 

► Determining possible marketing strategies 

► Defining the target market 

► Observing proximity to amenities for location attractions 
and value 

► Assessing historic characteristics of the site that may 
influence the project 


Financial Analysis 

Assess the financial risks of the project by: 

► Estimating cost of engineering, zoning, environmental 
consultant, legal ownership, taxation, and risk management 

► Estimating property values before and after project devlpmt. 

► Determining affordability, financing potential and services 

► Identifying lending institutions and other funding 
mechanisms 

*■ Understanding projected investment return and strategy 

Legal Liability Analysis 

Minimize the legal liability of the project by: 

► Reviewing the municipal planning and zoning ordinances to 
determine requirements, options, limitations on uses, and 
need for variances 

► Clarifying property ownership and owner cooperation 

► Assessing the political climate of the community and the 
political context of the stakeholders 

► Reviewing federal and local environmental requirements to 
assess not only risks, but ongoing regulatory/permitting 
requirements 

► Evaluating need and availability for environmental insurance 
policies that can be streamlined to satisfy a wide range of 
issues 

► Ensuring that historical liability insurance policies have been 
retained 

► Evaluating federal and local financial and/or tax incentives 

► Understanding tax implications (deductibility or 
capitalization) of environmental remediation costs 


Exhibit 3-2. Flow Chart of the Due Diligence Process 

16 


















Environmental Key , by Edith Perrer, Northeast 
Midwest Institute, 1997. Certain states, such as 
New Jersey, have placed a high priority on 
brownfields redevelopment, and are dedicating 
significant state funding to support such 
initiatives. By contacting the appropriate state 
department of environmental protection, 
developers can learn about opportunities related to 
their particular proposal. 

Legal Liability Analysis 

The purpose of legal analysis is to minimize the 
legal liability associated with the redevelopment 
process. The application and parameters of zoning 
ordinances, as well as options and limitations on 
use need to be clear to the developer. The need for 
a zoning variance and the political climate 
regarding granting of variances can be generally 
ascertained through discussions with the local real 
estate community. Legal counsel can help the 
developer clarify property ownership, and any 
legal encumbrances on the property, e.g. rights-of- 
way, easements. An environmental attorney can 
also assist the planner/developer to identify 
applicable regulatory and permitting requirements, 
as well as offer general predictions regarding the 
time frames for attaining these milestones 
throughout the development process. All of the 
above legal concerns are relevant to any land 
purchase. 

Special legal concerns arise from the process of 
redeveloping a brownfields site. Those concerns 
include reviewing federal and local environmental 
requirements to assess not only risks, but ongoing 
regulatory/permitting requirements. In recent 
years, several changes have occurred in the law 
defining liability related to brownfields site 
contamination and cleanup. New legislation has 
generally been directed to mitigating the strict 
assignment of liability established by the 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or 
“Superfund”), enacted by Congress in 1980. 
While CERCLA has had numerous positive 
effects, it also represents barriers to redeveloping 
brownfields, most importantly the unknown 
liability costs related to uncertainty over the extent 
of contamination present at a site. Several 


successful CERCLA liability defenses have 
evolved and the EPA has reformed its 
administrative policy in support of increased 
brownfields redevelopment. In addition to 
legislative attempts to deal with the disincentives 
created by CERCLA, most states have developed 
voluntary cleanup or similar programs with 
liability assurances documented in agreements 
with the EPA ( Brownfields Redevelopment: A 
Guidebook for Local Governments & 
Communities, International City/County 
Management Association, 1997). 

Another opportunity for risk protection for the 
developer is environmental insurance. Evaluation 
of the need and availability of environmental 
insurance policies that can be streamlined to 
satisfy a wide range of issues should be part of the 
analysis of legal liability. Understanding whether 
historical insurance policies have been retained, as 
well as the applicability of such policies, is also a 
dimension of the legal analysis. 

Understanding tax implications, including 
deductibility or capitalization of environmental 
remediation costs, is a feature of legal liability 
analysis. Also, federal, state or local tax or other 
financial incentives may be available to support 
the developer’s financing capacity. 

Conclusion 

If the Phase I site assessment and due diligence 
adequately informs state and local officials, 
planners, community representatives, and other 
stakeholders that no contamination exists at the 
site, or that contamination is so minimal that it 
does not pose a health or environmental risk, those 
involved may decide that adequate site assessment 
has been accomplished and the process of 
redevelopment may proceed. 

In some cases where evidence of contamination 
exists, stakeholders may decide that enough 
information is available from the site assessment 
and due diligence to characterize the site and 
determine an appropriate approach for site cleanup 
of the contamination. In other cases, stakeholders 
may decide that additional testing is warranted, 


17 


and a Phase II site investigation should be 
conducted, as described in the next chapter. 


18 


Chapter 4 

Phase II Site Investigation 


Background 

Data collected during the Phase 1 site assessment 
may conclude that contaminant(s) exist at the site 
and/or that further study is necessary to determine 
the extent of contamination. The purpose of a 
Phase II site investigation is to give planners and 
decision-makers objective and credible data about 
the contamination at a brownfields site to help 
them develop an appropriate contaminant 
management strategy. A site investigation is 
typically conducted by an environmental 
professional. This process evaluates the following 
types of data: 

5 s " Types of contamination present; 

5 s * Cleanup and reuse goals; 

Length of time required to reach cleanup 

goals; 

Post-treatment care needed; and 
^ Costs. 

A site investigation involves setting appropriate 
data quality goals based upon brownfields 
redevelopment goals, using appropriate screening 
levels for the contaminants, and conducting 
environmental sampling and analysis. 

Data gathering in a site investigation may typically 
include soil, water, and air sampling to identify the 
types, quantity, and extent of contamination in 
these various environmental media. The types of 
data used in a site investigation can vary from 
compiling existing site data (if adequate), to 
conducting limited sampling of the site, to 
mounting an extensive contaminant-specific or 
site-specific sampling effort. Planners should use 
knowledge of past facility operations whenever 
possible to focus the site evaluation on those 
process areas where pollutants were stored, 
handled, used, or disposed of. These will be the 
areas where potential contamination will be most 
readily identified. Generally, to minimize costs, a 


Perform Phase I 
Site Assessment 
and Due Diligence 




site investigation begins with limited sampling 
(assuming readily available data does not 
adequately characterize the type and extent of 
contamination on the site) and proceed to more 
comprehensive sampling if needed (e.g., if the 
initial sampling could not identify the 
geographical limits of contamination). 


19 








Phase II Site Investigation 

Sample the Site to Identify the Type, Quantity, and 

Extent of the Contamination 


Set Data Quality Objectives (DQO) 



DQOs are qualitative and quantitative statements 
specified to ensure that data of known and appropriate 
quality are obtained. The DQO process is a series of 
planning steps, typically as follows: 

► State the problem 

► Identify the decision 

► Identify inputs to the decision 

► Define the study boundaries 

► Develop a decision rule 

► Specify limits on decision errors 


4 


Establish Screening Levels 



Establish an appropriate set of screening levels for 
contaminants in soil, water, and/or air using an 
appropriate risk-based method, such as: 

► EPA Soil Screening Guidance (EPA/R-96/128) 

► Generic screening levels developed by states for 
industrial and residential use 


4 


Conduct Environmental Sampling and 
Analysis 



Conduct environmental sampling and analysis. 

Typically Site Investigation begins with limited 

sampling, leading to a more comprehensive effort. 

Sampling and analysis considerations include: 

► A screening analysis tests for broad classes of 
contaminants, while a contaminant-specific analysis 
provides a more accurate, but more expensive, 
assessment 

► A field analysis provides immediate results and 
increased sampling flexibility, while laboratory 
analysis provides greater accuracy and specificity 


4 


Write Report 



Write report to document sampling findings. The report 
should discuss the DQOs, methodologies, limitations, 
and possible cleanup technologies and goals 




Exhibit 4-1. Flow Chart of the Site Investigation Process 


20 























Various environmental companies provide site 
investigation services. Additional information regarding 
selection of a site investigation service can be found in 
Assessing Contractor Capabilities for Streamlined Site 
Investigations (EPA/542-R00-001, January 2000). 

This chapter provides a general approach to site 
investigation; planners and decision-makers should 
expand and refine this approach for site-specific use at 
their own facilities. 

Setting Data Quality Objectives 

While it is not easy, and probably impossible, to 
completely characterize the contamination at a site, 
decisions still have to be made. EPA’s Data Quality 
Objectives (DQO) process provides a framework to 
make decisions under circumstances of data uncertainty. 
The DQO process uses a systematic approach that 
defines the purpose, scope, and quality requirements for 
the data collection effort. The DQO process consists of 
the following seven steps (EPA 2000): 

*• State the problem. Summarize the 

contamination problem that will require new 
environmental data, and identify the resources 
available to resolve the problem and to 
develop the conceptual site model. 

► Identify the decision that requires new 

environmental data to address the 

contamination problem. 

► Identify the inputs to the decision. Identify the 
information needed to support the decision 
and specify which inputs require new 
environmental measurements. 

► Define the study boundaries. Specify the 

spatial and temporal aspect of the 

environmental media that the data must 
represent to support the decision. 

► Develop a decision rule. Develop a logical "if 
...then..." statement that defines the conditions 
that would cause the decision-maker to choose 
among alternative actions. 


► Specify limits on decision errors. Specify the 
decision maker's acceptable limits on decision 
errors, which are used to establish 
performance goals for limiting uncertainty in 
the data. 

► Optimize the design for obtaining data. 
Identify the most resource-effective sampling 
and analysis design for generating data that 
are expected to satisfy the DQOs. 

Please refer to Data Quality Objectives Process for 
Hazardous Waste Site Investigations (EPA 2000) for 
more detailed information on the DQO process. 

Establish Screening Levels 

During the initial stages of a site investigation, planners 
should establish an appropriate set of screening levels 
for contaminants in soil, water, and/or air. Screening 
levels are risk-based benchmarks that represent 
concentrations of chemicals in environmental media 
that do not pose an unacceptable risk. Sample analyses 
of soils, water, and air at the facility can be compared 
with these benchmarks. If onsite contaminant levels 
exceed the screening levels, further investigation will be 
needed to determine if and to what extent cleanup is 
appropriate. If contaminant concentrations are below 
the screening level, for the intended use, no action is 
required. 

Some states have developed generic screening levels 
(e.g., for industrial and residential use), and EPA’s Soil 
Screening Guidance (EPA/540/R-96/128) includes 
generic screening levels for many contaminants. 
Generic screening levels may not account for 
site-specific factors that affect the concentration or 
migration of contaminants. Alternatively, screening 
levels can be developed using site-specific factors. 
While site-specific screening levels can more 
effectively incorporate elements unique to the site, 
developing site-specific standards is a time- and 
resource-intensive process. Planners should contact 
their state environmental offices and/or EPA regional 
offices for assistance in using screening levels and in 
developing site-specific screening levels. 


21 


Risk-based screening levels are based on 
calculations and models that determine the 
likelihood that exposure of a particular organism 
or plant to a particular level of a contaminant 
would result in a certain adverse effect. Risk-based 
screening levels have been developed for tap 
water, ambient air, fish, and soil. Some states or 
EPA regions also use regional background levels 
(or ranges) of contaminants in soil and Maximum 
Contaminant Levels (MCLs) in water established 
under the Safe Drinking Water Act as screening 
levels for some chemicals. In addition, some states 
and/or EPA regional offices have developed 
equations for converting soil screening levels to 
comparative levels for the analysis of air and 
groundwater. 

When a contaminant concentration exceeds a 
screening level, further site assessment activities 
(such as sampling the site at strategic locations 
and/or performing more detailed analysis) are 
needed to determine whether: (1) the concentration 
of the contaminant is relatively low and/or the 
extent of contamination is small and does not 
warrant cleanup for that particular chemical, or (2) 
the concentration or extent of contamination is 
high, and that site cleanup is needed (See Chapter 
5, Contaminant Management, for more 
information.) 

Using EPA's soil screening guidance for an initial 
brownfields investigation may be beneficial if no 
industrial screening levels are available or if the 
site may be used for residential purposes. 
However, it should be noted that EPA's soil 
screening guidance was designed for high-risk, 
Tier I sites, rather than brownfields, and 
conservatively assumes that future reuse will be 
residential. Using this guidance for a non- 
residential land use project could result in overly 
conservative screening levels. 

In addition to screening levels, EPA regional 
offices and some states have developed cleanup 
levels, known as corrective action levels. If 
contaminant concentrations are above corrective 
action levels, a cleanup action must be pursued. 
Screening levels should not be confused with 
corrective action levels; Chapter 5, Contaminant 


Management, provides more information on 
corrective action levels. 

Conduct Environmental Sampling and Data 
Analysis 

Environmental sampling and data analysis are 
integral parts of a site investigation process. Many 
different technologies are available to perform 
these activities, as discussed below. 

Levels of Sampling and Analysis 
There are two levels of sampling and analysis: 
screening and contaminant-specific. Planners are 
likely to use both levels at different stages of the 
site investigation. 

^ Screening. Screening sampling and analysis 
use relatively low-cost technologies to take a 
limited number of samples at the most likely 
points of contamination and analyze them for 
a limited number of parameters. Screening 
analyses often test only for broad classes of 
contaminants, such as total petroleum 
hydrocarbons, rather than for specific 
contaminants, such as benzene or toluene. 
Screening is used to narrow the range of areas 
of potential contamination and reduce the 
number of samples requiring further, more 
costly, analysis. Screening is generally 
performed on site, with a small percentage of 
samples (e.g., generally 10 percent) submitted 
to a state-approved laboratory for a full 
organic and inorganic screening analysis to 
validate or clarify the results obtained. 

Some geophysical methods are used in site 
assessments because they are noninvasive (i.e., 
do not disturb environmental media as 
sampling does). Geophysical methods are 
commonly used to detect underground objects 
that might exist at a site, such as USTs, dry 
wells, and drums. The two most common and 
cost-effective technologies used in 
geophysical surveys are ground-penetrating 
radar and electromagnetics. Table C-l in 
Appendix C contains an overview of 
geophysical methods. For more information 
on screening (including geophysical) methods, 
please refer to Subsurface Characterization 


22 


and Monitoring Techniques: A Desk Reference 
Guide (EPA/625/R-93003a). 

5 s * Contaminant-specific Sampling. For a more 
in-depth understanding of contamination at a 
site (e.g., when screening data are not detailed 
enough), it may be necessary to analyze 
samples for specific contaminants. With 
contaminant-specific sampling and analysis, 
the number of parameters analyzed is much 
greater than for screening-level sampling, and 
analysis includes more accurate, higher-cost 
field and laboratory methods. Samples are sent 
to a state-approved laboratory to be tested 
under rigorous protocols to ensure 
high-quality results. Such analyses may take 
several weeks. For some contaminants, 
innovative field technologies are as capable, or 
nearly as capable, of achieving the accuracy of 
laboratory technologies, which allows for a 
rapid turnaround of the results. The principal 
benefit of contaminant-specific analysis is the 
high quality and specificity of the analytical 
results. 

Increasing the Certainty of Sampling Results 

Statistical Sampling Plan. Statistical sampling 
plans use statistical principles to determine the 
number of samples needed to accurately represent 
the contamination present. With the statistical 
sampling method, samples are usually analyzed 
with highly accurate laboratory or field 
technologies, which increase costs and take 
additional time. Using this approach, planners can 
consult with regulators and determine in advance 
specific measures of allowable uncertainty (e.g., 
an 80 percent level of confidence with a 25 
percent allowable error). 

Use of Lower-cost Technologies with Higher 
Detection Limits to Collect a Greater Number of 
Samples. This approach provides a more 
comprehensive picture of contamination at the 
site, but with less detail regarding the specific 
contamination. Such an approach would not be 
recommended to identify the extent of 
contamination by a specific contaminant, such as 
benzene, but may be an excellent approach for 
defining the extent of contamination by total 


organic compounds with a strong degree of 
certainty. 

Site Investigation Technologies 
This section discusses the differences between 
using field and laboratory technologies and 
provides an overview of applicable site 
investigation technologies. In recent years, several 
innovative technologies that have been field-tested 
and applied to hazardous waste problems have 
emerged. In many cases, innovative technologies 
may cost less than conventional techniques and 
can successfully provide the needed data. 
Operating conditions may affect the cost and 
effectiveness of individual technologies. 

Field versus Laboratory Analysis 
The principal advantages of performing field 
sampling and field analysis are that results are 
immediately available and more samples can be 
taken during the same sampling event; also, 
sampling locations can be adjusted immediately to 
clarify the first round of sampling results, if 
warranted. This approach may reduce costs 
associated with conducting additional sampling 
events after receipt of laboratory analysis. Field 
assessment methods have improved significantly 
over recent years; however, while many field 
technologies may be comparable to laboratory 
technologies, some field technologies may not 
detect contamination at levels as low as laboratory 
methods, and may not be contaminant-specific. To 
validate the field results or to gain more 
information on specific contaminants, a small 
percentage of the samples can be sent for 
laboratory analysis. The choice of sampling and 
analytical procedures should be based on Data 
Quality Objectives established earlier in the 
process, which determine the quality (e.g., 
precision, level of detection) of the data needed to 
adequately evaluate site conditions and identify 
appropriate cleanup technologies. 

Sample Collection Technologies 
Sample collection technologies vary widely, 
depending on the medium being sampled and the 
type of analysis required, based on the Data 
Quality Objectives (see the section on this subject 
earlier in this document). For example, soil 


23 


samples are generally collected using spoons, 
scoops, and shovels, while subsurface sampling is 
more complex. The selection of a subsurface 
sample collection technology depends on the 
subsurface conditions (e.g., consolidated materials, 
bedrock), the required sampling depth and level of 
analysis, and the extent of sampling anticipated. If 
subsequent sampling efforts are likely, installing 
semipermanent well casings with a well-drilling 
rig may be appropriate. If limited sampling is 
expected, direct push methods, such as cone 
penetrometers, may be more cost-effective. The 
types of contaminants will also play a key role in 
the selection of sampling methods, devices, 
containers, and preservation techniques. 

Groundwater contamination should be assessed in 
all areas, particularly where solvents or acids have 
been used. Solvents can be very mobile in 
subsurface soils; and acids, such as those used in 
finishing operations, increase the mobility of metal 
compounds. Groundwater samples should be 
taken at and below the water table in the surficial 
aquifer. Cone penetrometer technology is a 
cost-effective approach for collecting these 
samples. The samples then can be screened for 
contaminants using field methods such as: 

pH meters to screen for the presence of acids; 

Colormetric tubes to screen for volatile 

organics; and 

^ X-ray fluorescence to screen for metals. 

Tables C-2 through C-4 in Appendix C list more 
information on various sample collection 
technologies, including a comparison of detection 
limits and costs. 

The following chapter describes various 
contaminant management strategies that are 
available to the developer. 


24 


Chapter 5 

Contaminant Management 


Background 

The purpose of this chapter is to help planners and 
decision-makers select an appropriate remedial 
alternative. This section contains information on 
developing a contaminant management plan and 
discusses various contaminant management 
options, from institutional controls and 
containment strategies, through cleanup 
technologies. Finally, this chapter provides an 
overview of post-construction issues that planners 
and decision-makers need to consider when 
selecting alternatives. 

The principal factors that will influence the 
selection of a cleanup technology include: 

^ Types of contamination present; 

^ Cleanup and reuse goals; 

Length of time required to reach cleanup 
goals; 

Post-treatment care needed; and 
^ Budget. 

The selection of appropriate remedy options often 
involves tradeoffs, particularly between time and 
cost. A companion document, Cost Estimating 
Tools and Resources for Addressing Sites Linder 
the Brownfields Initiative (EPA/625/R-99/001 
April 1999), provides information on cost factors 
and developing cost estimates. In general, the 
more intensive the cleanup approach, the more 
quickly the contamination will be mitigated and 
the more costly the effort. In the case of 
brownfields cleanup, both time and cost can be 
major concerns, considering the planner’s desire to 
return the facility to reuse as quickly as possible. 
Thus, the planner may wish to explore a number of 
options and weigh carefully the costs and benefits 
of each. 

Selection of remedial alternatives is also likely to 
involve the input of remediation professionals. 
The overview of technologies cited in this chapter 
provides the planner with a framework for 
seeking, interpreting, and evaluating professional 



input. The intended use of the brownfields site will 
drive the level of cleanup needed to make the site 
safe for redevelopment and reuse. Brownfields 
sites are by definition not Superfund sites; that is, 
brownfields sites usually have lower levels of 
contamination present and, therefore, generally 
require less extensive cleanup efforts than 
Superfund sites. Nevertheless, all potential 
pathways of exposure, based on the intended reuse 
of the site, must be addressed in the site 
assessment and cleanup; if no pathways of 
exposure exist, less cleanup (or possibly none) 
may be required. 


Perform Phase I 
Site Assessment 
and Due Diligence 



25 











Some regional EPA and state offices have 
developed corrective action levels (CALs) for 
different chemicals, which may serve as guidelines 
or legal requirements for cleanups. It is important 
to understand that screening levels (discussed in 
“Performing a Phase II Site Assessment” above) 
are different from cleanup (or corrective action) 
levels. Screening levels indicate whether further 
site investigation is warranted for a particular 
contaminant. CALs indicate whether cleanup 
action is needed and how extensive it needs to be. 
Planners should check with their state 
environmental office for guidance and/or 
requirements for CALs. 

Evaluate Remedial Alternatives 

If the site investigation shows that there is an 
unacceptable level of contamination, the problem 
will have to be remedied. Exhibit 5-1 shows a 
flow chart of the remedial alternative evaluation 
process. 

Establishing Remedial Goals 
The first step in evaluating remedial alternatives is 
to articulate the remedial goals. Remedial goals 
relate very specifically to the intended use of the 
redeveloped site. A property to be used for a 
plastics factory may not need to be cleaned up to 
the same level as a site that will be used a school. 
Future land use holds the key to practical 
brownfields redevelopment plans. Knowledge of 
federal, state, local or tribal requirements helps to 
ensure realistic assumptions. Community 
surroundings, as seen through a visual inspection 
will help provide a context for future land uses, 
though many large brownfields redevelopment 
projects have provided the catalyst to overall 
neighborhood refurbishment. Available funding 
and timeframe for the project are also very 
significant factors in defining remedial goals. 

Developing a List of Options 
Developing a list of remedial options may begin 
with a literature search of existing technologies, 
many of which are listed in Exhibit D-l of this 
document. Analysis of technical information on 
technology applicability requires a professional 
remediation specialist. However, general 
information is provided below for the community 


planner/developer in order to support informed 
interaction with the remediation professional. 

Remedial alternatives fall under three categories, 
institutional controls, containment technologies, 
and cleanup technologies. In many cases, the final 
remedial strategy will involve aspects of all three 
approaches. 

Develop Remedy Implementation Plan 

The remedy implementation plan, as developed by 
a professional environmental engineer, describes 
the approach that will be used to contain and clean 
up contamination. In developing this plan, 
planners and decision-makers should incorporate 
stakeholder concerns and consider a range of 
possible options, with the intent of identifying the 
most cost-effective approaches for cleaning up the 
site, considering time and cost concerns. The 
remedy implementation plan should include the 
following elements: 

^ A clear delineation of environmental concerns 
at the site. Areas should be discussed 
separately if the management approach for one 
area is different than that for other areas of the 
site. Clear documentation of existing 
conditions at the site and a summarized 
assessment of the nature and scope of 
contamination should be included. 

^ A recommended management approach for 
each environmental concern that takes into 
account expected land reuse plans and the 
adequacy of the technology selected. 

A cost estimate that reflects both expected 
capital and operating/maintenance costs. 

^ Post-construction maintenance requirements 
for the recommended approach. 

^ A discussion of the assumptions made to 
support the recommended management 
approach, as well as the limitations of the 
approach. 


26 


Evaluate Remedial Alternatives 

Compile and Assess Possible Remedial Alternatives 
for the Brownfields Site 

Establish Remedial Goals 

Determine an appropriate and feasible remedy level 
and compile preliminary list of potential contaminant 
management strategies, based on: 

► Federal, state, local, or tribal requirements 

► Community surroundings 

► Available funding 

_ ► Timeframe _ 

I 


Develop List of Options 

Compile list of potential remedial alternatives by: 

► Conducting literature search of existing technologies 

► Analyzing technical information on technology 
applicability 


_I_ 

Initial Screening of Options 

Narrow the list of potential remedial alternatives by: 

► Networking with other brownfields stakeholders 

► Identifying the data needed to support evaluation of 
options 

► Evaluating the options by assessing toxicity levels, 
exposure pathways, risk, future land use, and 
financial considerations 

► Analyzing the applicability of an option to the 

contamination. _ 

_I_ 

Select Best Remedial Option 

Select appropriate remedial option by: 

► Integrating management alternatives with reuse 
alternatives to identify potential constraints on 
reuse, considering time schedules, cost, and risk 
factors 

► Balancing risk minimization with redevelopment 
goals, future uses, and community needs 

► Communicating information about the proposed 
option to brownfields stakeholders 


Exhibit 5-1. Flow Chart of the Remedial Alternative Evaluation Process 


27 























Planners and decision-makers can use the 
framework developed during the initial site 
evaluation (see the section on "Site Assessment") 
and the controls and technologies described below 
to compare the effectiveness of the least costly 
approaches for meeting the required management 
goals established in the Data Quality Objectives. 
These goals should be established at levels that are 
consistent with the expected reuse plans. Exhibit 
5-2 shows the remedy implementation plan 
development process. 

A remedy implementation plan should involve 
stakeholders in the community in the development 
of the plan. Some examples of various 
stakeholders are: 

5 s " Industry; 

^ City, county, state and federal governments; 

5 s * Community groups, residents and leaders; 

^ Developers and other private businesses; 

Banks and lenders; 

^ Environmental groups; 

Educational institutes; 

^ Community development organizations; 

Environmental justice advocates; 

5 s " Communities of color and low-income; and 
^ Environmental regulatory agencies. 

Community-based organizations represent a wide 
range of issues, from environmental concerns to 
housing issues to economic development. These 
groups can often be helpful in educating planners 
and decision-makers in the community about local 
brownfields sites, which can contribute to 
successful brownfields site assessment and 
cleanup activities. In addition, state voluntary 
cleanup programs require that local communities 
be adequately informed about brownfields cleanup 
activities. Planners can contact the local Chamber 
of Commerce, local philanthropic organizations, 
local service organizations, and neighborhood 
committees for community input. Representatives 
from EPA regional offices and state and local 
environmental groups may be able to supply 
relevant information and identify other appropriate 
community organizations. Involving the local 
community in brownfields projects is a key 
component in the success of such projects. 


Remedy Implementation 

Many of the management technologies that leave 
contamination onsite, either in containment 
systems or because of the long periods required to 
reach management goals, will require long-term 
maintenance and possibly operation. If waste is 
left onsite, regulators will likely require long-term 
monitoring of applicable media (e.g., soil, water, 
and/or air) to ensure that the management 
approach selected is continuing to function as 
planned (e.g., residual contamination, if any, 
remains at acceptable levels and is not migrating). 
If long-term monitoring is required (e.g., by the 
state) periodic sampling, analysis, and reporting 
requirements will also be involved. Planners and 
decision-makers should be aware of these 
requirements and provide for them in cleanup 
budgets. Post-construction sampling, analysis, and 
reporting costs can be substantial and therefore 
need to be addressed in cleanup budgets. 


28 


Develop Remedy Implementation Plan 

Coordinate with Stakeholders to Design a Remedy 
Implementation Plan 

Review Records 

Ensure compliance with applicable Federal, state, and 

tribal regulatory guidelines by: 

► Consulting with appropriate state, local, and tribal 
regulatory agencies and including them in the 
decisionmaking process as early as possible 

► Contacting the EPA regional Brownfields 
coordinator to identify and determine the 
availability of EPA support Programs 

► Identifying all environmental requirements that 
must be met 

Develop Plan 

Develop plan incorporating the selected remedial 

alternative. Include the following considerations: 

► Schedule for completion of project 

► Available funds 

► Developers, financiers, construction firms, and local 
community concerns 

► Procedures for community participation, such as 
community advisory boards 

► Contingency plans for possible discovery of 
additional contaminants 

► Implementation of selected management option 


Exhibit 5-2. Flow Chart of the Remedy Implementation Plan Development Process 


29 













Chapter 6 
Conclusion 


Brownfields redevelopment contributes to the 
revitalization of communities across the U.S. 
Reuse of these abandoned, contaminated sites 
spurs economic growth, builds community pride, 
protects public health, and helps maintain our 
nation's "greenfields," often at a relatively low 
cost. This document in conjunction with the 
General Guide provide an overview of the 
technical methods that can be used to achieve 
successful site assessment and cleanup, which are 
two key components in the brownfields 
redevelopment process. 

This railroad yards site profile provides the 
technical information necessary to conduct a 
successful brownfields redevelopment at such a 
site. However, each site is unique and the specific 
cleanup activities will be dictated by the site 
assessment, future use of the site, budget and time 
frame. Several railroad yards have been 
redeveloped for other uses. Some of these have 
been highlighted throughout this document. Users 
can review internet resources for the most recent 
redevelopment of railroad yard sites. 

To avoid problems throughout the process it is 
important that stakeholders are involved from the 
beginning. Consultation with state and local 
environmental officials and community leaders, as 
well as careful planning early in the project, will 
allow planners to develop the most appropriate site 
assessment and cleanup approaches. Planners 
should also determine early on if they are likely to 
require the assistance of environmental engineers. 
A site assessment strategy should be agreeable to 
all stakeholders and should address: 

The type and extent of any contamination 
present at the site; 

The types of data needed to adequately assess 
the site; 

^ Appropriate sampling and analytical methods 
for characterizing contamination; and 
An acceptable level of data uncertainty. 


When used appropriately, the process described in 
this document will help to ensure that a good 
strategy is developed and implemented effectively. 

Once the site has been assessed and stakeholders 
agree that cleanup is needed, planners will need to 
consider the cleanup options. Many different types 
of cleanup technologies are available. The 
guidance provided in this document on selecting 
appropriate methods directs planners to base 
cleanup initiatives on site- and project-specific 
conditions. The type and extent of cleanup will 
depend in large part on the type and level of 
contamination present, reuse goals, and the budget 
available. Certain cleanup technologies are used 
onsite, while others require offsite treatment. Also, 
in certain circumstances, containment of 
contamination onsite and the use of institutional 
controls may be important components of the 
cleanup effort. Finally, planners will need to 
include budgetary provisions and plans for 
post-cleanup and post-construction care if it is 
required at the brownfields site. By developing a 
technically sound site assessment and cleanup 
approach that is based on site-specific conditions 
and addresses the concerns of all project 
stakeholders, planners can achieve brownfield 
redevelopment and reuse goals effectively and 
safely. 


30 


Appendix A 
Acronyms 


ASTM 

American Society for Testing and Materials 

BTEX 

Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, and Xylene 

CERCLIS 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System 

DQO 

Data Quality Objective 

EPA 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

NPDES 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

O&M 

Operations and Maintenance 

ORD 

Office of Research and Development 

OSWER 

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response 

PAH 

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon 

PCB 

Polychlorinated Biphenyl 

PCP 

Pentachlorophenol 

RCRA 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

SVE 

Soil Vapor Extraction 

SVOC 

Semi-Volatile Organic Compound 

TCE 

Trichloroethylene 

TIO 

Technology Innovation Office 

TPH 

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon 

UST 

Underground Storage Tank 

VCP 

Voluntary Cleanup Program 

VOC 

Volatile Organic Compound 


31 












































































































Appendix B 
Glossary 


Air Sparging In air sparging, air is injected into 
the ground below a contaminated area, forming 
bubbles that rise and carry trapped and dissolved 
contaminants to the surface where they are 
captured by a soil vapor extraction system. Air 
sparging may be a good choice of treatment 
technology at sites contaminated with solvents and 
other volatile organic compounds (VOCs). See 
also Volatile Organic Compound. 

Air Stripping Air stripping is a treatment method 
that removes or "strips" VOCs from contaminated 
groundwater or surface water as air is forced 
through the water, causing the compounds to 
evaporate. See also Volatile Organic Compound. 

American Society for Testing and Materials 
(ASTM) The ASTM sets standards for many 
services, including methods of sampling and 
testing of hazardous waste, and media 
contaminated with hazardous waste. 

Aquifer An aquifer is an underground rock 
formation composed of such materials as sand, 
soil, or gravel that can store groundwater and 
supply it to wells and springs. 

Aromatics Aromatics are organic compounds that 
contain 6-carbon ring structures, such as creosote, 
toluene, and phenol, that often are found at dry 
cleaning and electronic assembly sites. 

Baseline Risk Assessment A baseline risk 
assessment is an assessment conducted before 
cleanup activities begin at a site to identify and 
evaluate the threat to human health and the 
environment. After cleanup has been completed, 
the information obtained during a baseline risk 
assessment can be used to determine whether the 
cleanup levels were reached. 

Bedrock Bedrock is the rock that underlies the 
soil; it can be permeable or non-permeable. See 
also Confining Layer and Creosote. 

Bioremediation Bioremediation refers to 
treatment processes that use microorganisms 


(usually naturally occurring) such as bacteria, 
yeast, or fungi to break down hazardous 
substances into less toxic or nontoxic substances. 
Bioremediation can be used to clean up 
contaminated soil and water. In situ 
bioremediation treats the contaminated soil or 
groundwater in the location in which it is found. 
For ex situ bioremediation processes, 
contaminated soil must be excavated or 
groundwater pumped before they can be treated. 

Bioventing Bioventing is an in situ cleanup 
technology that combines soil vapor extraction 
methods with bioremediation. It uses vapor 
extraction wells that induce air flow in the 
subsurface through air injection or through the use 
of a vacuum. Bioventing can be effective in 
cleaning up releases of petroleum products, such 
as gasoline, jet fuels, kerosene, and diesel fuel. 
See also Bioremediation. 

Borehole A borehole is a hole cut into the ground 
by means of a drilling rig. 

Borehole Geophysics Borehole geophysics are 
nuclear or electric technologies used to identify 
the physical characteristics of geologic formations 
that are intersected by a borehole. 

Brownfields Brownfields sites are abandoned, 
idled, or under-used industrial and commercial 
facilities where expansion or redevelopment is 
complicated by real or perceived environmental 
contamination. 

BTEX BTEX is the term used for benzene, 
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene-volatile 
aromatic compounds typically found in petroleum 
products, such as gasoline and diesel fuel. 

Cadmium Cadmium is a heavy metal that 
accumulates in the environment. See also Heavy 
Metal. 

Carbon Adsorption Carbon adsorption is a 
treatment method that removes contaminants from 
groundwater or surface water as the water is 


33 


forced through tanks containing activated carbon. 

Chemical Dehalogen ation Chemical 
dehalogenation is a chemical process that removes 
halogens (usually chlorine) from a chemical 
contaminant, rendering the contaminant less 
hazardous. The chemical dehalogenation process 
can be applied to common halogenated 
contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls 
(PCBs), dioxins (DDT), and certain chlorinated 
pesticides, which may be present in soil and oils. 
The treatment time is short, energy requirements 
are moderate, and operation and maintenance 
costs are relatively low. This technology can be 
brought to the site, eliminating the need to 
transport hazardous wastes. See also 
Polychlorinated Biphenyl. 

Cleanup Cleanup is the term used for actions 
taken to deal with a release or threat of release of 
a hazardous substance that could affect humans 
and/or the environment. 

Colorimetric Colorimetric refers to chemical 
reaction-based indicators that are used to produce 
compound reactions to individual compounds, or 
classes of compounds. The reactions, such as 
visible color changes or other easily noted 
indications, are used to detect and quantify 
contaminants. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Information 
System (CERCLIS) CERCLIS is a database that 
serves as the official inventory of Superfund 
hazardous waste sites. CERCLIS also contains 
information about all aspects of hazardous waste 
sites, from initial discovery to deletion from the 
National Priorities List (NPL). The database also 
maintains information about planned and actual 
site activities and financial information entered by 
EPA regional offices. CERCLIS records the 
targets and accomplishments of the Superfund 
program and is used to report that information to 
the EPA Administrator, Congress, and the public. 
See also National Priorities List and Superfund. 

Confining Layer A confining layer is a 
geological formation characterized by low 
permeability that inhibits the flow of water. See 


also Bedrock and Permeability. 

Contaminant A contaminant is any physical, 
chemical, biological, or radiological substance or 
matter present in any media at concentrations that 
may result in adverse effects on air, water, or soil. 

Data Quality Objective (DQO) DQOs are 
qualitative and quantitative statements specified to 
ensure that data of known and appropriate quality 
are obtained. The DQO process is a series of 
planning steps, typically conducted during site 
assessment and investigation, that is designed to 
ensure that the type, quantity, and quality of 
environmental data used in decision-making are 
appropriate. The DQO process involves a logical, 
step-by-step procedure for determining which of 
the complex issues affecting a site are the most 
relevant to planning a site investigation before any 
data are collected. 

Disposal Disposal is the final placement or 
destruction of toxic, radioactive or other wastes; 
surplus or banned pesticides or other chemicals; 
polluted soils; and drums containing hazardous 
materials from removal actions or accidental 
release. Disposal may be accomplished through 
the use of approved secure landfills, surface 
impoundments, land farming, deep well injection, 
ocean dumping, or incineration. 

Dual-Phase Extraction Dual-phase extraction is 
a technology that extracts contaminants 
simultaneously from soils in saturated and 
unsaturated zones by applying soil vapor 
extraction techniques to contaminants trapped in 
saturated zone soils. 

Electromagnetic (EM) Geophysics EM 

geophysics refers to technologies used to detect 
spatial (lateral and vertical) differences in 
subsurface electromagnetic characteristics. The 
data collected provide information about 
subsurface environments. 

Electromagnetic (EM) Induction EM induction 
is a geophysical technology used to induce a 
magnetic field beneath the earth's surface, which 
in turn causes a secondary magnetic field to form 
around nearby objects that have conductive 


34 


properties, such as ferrous and nonferrous metals. 
The secondary magnetic field is then used to 
detect and measure buried debris. 

Emergency Removal An emergency removal is 
an action initiated in response to a release of a 
hazardous substance that requires on-site activity 
within hours of a determination that action is 
appropriate. 

Emerging Technology An emerging technology 
is an innovative technology that currently is 
undergoing bench-scale testing. During 
bench-scale testing, a small version of the 
technology is built and tested in a laboratory. If 
the technology is successful during bench-scale 
testing, it is demonstrated on a small scale at field 
sites. If the technology is successful at the field 
demonstrations, it often will be used full scale at 
contaminated waste sites. The technology is 
continually improved as it is used and evaluated at 
different sites. See also Established Technology 
and Innovative Technology. 

Engineered Control An engineered control, such 
as barriers placed between contamination and the 
rest of a site, is a method of managing 
environmental and health risks. Engineered 
controls can be used to limit exposure pathways. 

Established Technology An established 
technology is a technology for which cost and 
performance information is readily available. Only 
after a technology has been used at many different 
sites and the results fully documented is that 
technology considered established. The most 
frequently used established technologies are 
incineration, solidification and stabilization, and 
pump-and-treat technologies for groundwater. See 
also Emerging Technology and Innovative 
Technology. 

Exposure Pathway An exposure pathway is the 
route of contaminants from the source of 
contamination to potential contact with a medium 
(air, soil, surface water, or groundwater) that 
represents a potential threat to human health or the 
environment. Determining whether exposure 
pathways exist is an essential step in conducting a 
baseline risk assessment. See also Baseline Risk 


Assessment. 

Ex Situ The term ex situ or "moved from its 
original place," means excavated or removed. 

Filtration Filtration is a treatment process that 
removes solid matter from water by passing the 
water through a porous medium, such as sand or a 
manufactured filter. 

Flame Ionization Detector (FID) An FID is an 
instrument often used in conjunction with gas 
chromatography to measure the change of signal 
as analytes are ionized by a hydrogen-air flame. It 
also is used to detect phenols, phthalates, 
polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAH), VOCs, and 
petroleum hydrocarbons. See also Polyaromatic 
Hydrocarbons and Volatile Organic Compounds. 

Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy A 
Fourier transform infrared spectroscope is an 
analytical air monitoring tool that uses a laser 
system chemically to identify contaminants. 

Fumigant A fumigant is a pesticide that is 
vaporized to kill pests. They often are used in 
buildings and greenhouses. 

Furan Furan is a colorless, volatile liquid 
compound used in the synthesis of organic 
compounds, especially nylon. 

Gas Chromatography Gas chromatography is a 
technology used for investigating and assessing 
soil, water, and soil gas contamination at a site. It 
is used for the analysis of VOCs and semivolatile 
organic compounds (SVOC). The technique 
identifies and quantifies organic compounds on 
the basis of molecular weight, characteristic 
fragmentation patterns, and retention time. Recent 
advances in gas chromatography considered 
innovative are portable, weather-proof units that 
have self-contained power supplies. 

Ground-Penetrating Radar (GPR) GPR is a 

technology that emits pulses of electromagnetic 
energy into the ground to measure its reflection 
and refraction by subsurface layers and other 
features, such as buried debris. 

Groundwater Groundwater is the water found 
beneath the earth's surface that fills pores between 


35 


such materials as sand, soil, or gravel and that 
often supplies wells and springs. See also Aquifer. 

Hazardous Substance A hazardous substance is 
any material that poses a threat to public health or 
the environment. Typical hazardous substances 
are materials that are toxic, corrosive, ignitable, 
explosive, or chemically reactive. If a certain 
quantity of a hazardous substance, as established 
by EPA, is spilled into the water or otherwise 
emitted into the environment, the release must be 
reported. Under certain federal legislation, the 
term excludes petroleum, crude oil, natural gas, 
natural gas liquids, or synthetic gas usable for 
fuel. 

Heavy Metal Heavy metal refers to a group of 
toxic metals including arsenic, chromium, copper, 
lead, mercury, silver, and zinc. Heavy metals often 
are present at industrial sites at which operations 
have included battery recycling and metal plating. 

High-Frequency Electromagnetic (EM) 
Sounding High-frequency EM sounding, the 
technology used for non-intrusive geophysical 
exploration, projects high-frequency 
electromagnetic radiation into subsurface layers to 
detect the reflection and refraction of the radiation 
by various layers of soil. Unlike 
ground-penetrating radar, which uses pulses, the 
technology uses continuous waves of radiation. 
See also Ground-Penetrating Radar. 

Hydrocarbon A hydrocarbon is an organic 
compound containing only hydrogen and carbon, 
often occurring in petroleum, natural gas, and 
coal. 

Hydrogeology Hydrogeology is the study of 
groundwater, including its origin, occurrence, 
movement, and quality. 

Hydrology Hydrology is the science that deals 
with the properties, movement, and effects of 
water found on the earth's surface, in the soil and 
rocks beneath the surface, and in the atmosphere. 

Ignitability Ignitable wastes can create fires under 
certain conditions. Examples include liquids, such 
as solvents that readily catch fire, and 
friction-sensitive substances. 


Immunoassay Immunoassay is an innovative 
technology used to measure compound-specific 
reactions (generally colorimetric) to individual 
compounds or classes of compounds. The 
reactions are used to detect and quantify 
contaminants. The technology is available in 
field-portable test kits. 

Incineration Incineration is a treatment 
technology that involves the burning of certain 
types of solid, liquid, or gaseous materials under 
controlled conditions to destroy hazardous waste. 

Infrared Monitor An infrared monitor is a device 
used to monitor the heat signature of an object, as 
well as to sample air. It may be used to detect 
buried objects in soil. 

Inorganic Compound An inorganic compound is 
a compound that generally does not contain 
carbon atoms (although carbonate and bicarbonate 
compounds are notable exceptions), tends to be 
soluble in water, and tends to react on an ionic 
rather than on a molecular basis. Examples of 
inorganic compounds include various acids, 
potassium hydroxide, and metals. 

Innovative Technology An innovative technology 
is a process that has been tested and used as a 
treatment for hazardous waste or other 
contaminated materials, but lacks a long history of 
full-scale use and information about its cost and 
how well it works sufficient to support prediction 
of its performance under a variety of operating 
conditions. An innovative technology is one that is 
undergoing pilot-scale treatability studies that are 
usually conducted in the field or the laboratory; 
require installation of the technology; and provide 
performance, cost, and design objectives for the 
technology. Innovative technologies are being 
used under many Federal and state cleanup 
programs to treat hazardous wastes that have been 
improperly released. For example, innovative 
technologies are being selected to manage 
contamination (primarily petroleum) at some 
leaking underground storage sites. See also 
Emerging Technology and Established 
Technology. 

In Situ The term in situ, "in its original place," or 


36 


"on-site", means unexcavated and unmoved. In 
situ soil flushing and natural attenuation are 
examples of in situ treatment methods by which 
contaminated sites are treated without digging up 
or removing the contaminants. 

In Situ Oxidation In situ oxidation is an 
innovative treatment technology that oxidizes 
contaminants that are dissolved in groundwater 
and converts them into insoluble compounds. 

In Situ Soil Flushing In situ soil flushing is an 
innovative treatment technology that floods 
contaminated soils beneath the ground surface 
with a solution that moves the contaminants to an 
area from which they can be removed. The 
technology requires the drilling of injection and 
extraction wells on site and reduces the need for 
excavation, handling, or transportation of 
hazardous substances. Contaminants considered 
for treatment by in situ soil flushing include heavy 
metals (such as lead, copper, and zinc), aromatics, 
and PCBs. See also Aromatics, Heavy Metal, and 
Polychlorinated Biphenyl. 

In Situ Vitrification In situ vitrification is a soil 
treatment technology that stabilizes metal and 
other inorganic contaminants in place at 
temperatures of approximately 3000* F. Soils and 
sludges are fused to form a stable glass and 
crystalline structure with very low leaching 
characteristics. 

Institutional Controls An institutional control is a 
legal or institutional measure which subjects a 
property owner to limit activities at or access to a 
particular property. They are used to ensure 
protection of human health and the environment, 
and to expedite property reuse. Fences, posting or 
warning signs, and zoning and deed restrictions 
are examples of institutional controls. 

Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) IRIS is 
an electronic database that contains EPA's latest 
descriptive and quantitative regulatory 
information about chemical constituents. Files on 
chemicals maintained in IRIS contain information 
related to both non-carcinogenic and carcinogenic 
health effects. 


Landfarming Landfarming is the spreading and 
incorporation of wastes into the soil to initiate 
biological treatment. 

Landfill A sanitary landfill is a land disposal site 
for nonhazardous solid wastes at which the waste 
is spread in layers compacted to the smallest 
practical volume. 

Laser-Induced Fluorescence/Cone 
Penetrometer Laser-induced fluorescence/cone 
penetrometer is a field screening method that 
couples a fiber optic-based chemical sensor 
system to a cone penetrometer mounted on a 
truck. The technology can be used for 
investigating and assessing soil and water 
contamination. 

Lead Lead is a heavy metal that is hazardous to 
health if breathed or swallowed. Its use in 
gasoline, paints, and plumbing compounds has 
been sharply restricted or eliminated by Federal 
laws and regulations. See also Heavy Metal. 

Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) 

LUST is the acronym for "leaking underground 
storage tank." See also Underground Storage 
Tank. 

Magnetrometry Magnetrometry is a geophysical 
technology used to detect disruptions that metal 
objects cause in the earth's localized magnetic 
field. 

Mass Spectrometry Mass spectrometry is an 
analytical process by which molecules are broken 
into fragments to determine the concentrations and 
mass/charge ratio of the fragments. Innovative 
mass spectroscopy units, developed through 
modification of large laboratory instruments, are 
sometimes portable, weatherproof units with 
self-contained power supplies. 

Medium A medium is a specific environment -- 
air, water, or soil -- which is the subject of 
regulatory concern and activities. 

Mercury Mercury is a heavy metal that can 
accumulate in the environment and is highly toxic 
if breathed or swallowed. Mercury is found in 
thermometers, measuring devices, pharmaceutical 


37 


and agricultural chemicals, chemical 
manufacturing, and electrical equipment. See also 
Heavy Metal. 

Mercury Vapor Analyzer A mercury vapor 
analyzer is an instrument that provides real-time 
measurements of concentrations of mercury in the 
air. 

Methane Methane is a colorless, nonpoisonous, 
flammable gas created by anaerobic 
decomposition of organic compounds. 

Migration Pathway A migration pathway is a 
potential path or route of contaminants from the 
source of contamination to contact with human 
populations or the environment. Migration 
pathways include air, surface water, groundwater, 
and land surface. The existence and identification 
of all potential migration pathways must be 
considered during assessment and characterization 
of a waste site. 

Mixed Waste Mixed waste is low-level 
radioactive waste contaminated with hazardous 
waste that is regulated under the Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Mixed 
waste can be disposed only in compliance with the 
requirements under RCRA that govern disposal of 
hazardous waste and with the RCRA land disposal 
restrictions, which require that waste be treated 
before it is disposed of in appropriate landfills. 

Monitoring Well A monitoring well is a well 
drilled at a specific location on or off a hazardous 
waste site at which groundwater can be sampled at 
selected depths and studied to determine the 
direction of groundwater flow and the types and 
quantities of contaminants present in the 
groundwater. 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 
System (NPDES) NPDES is the primary 
permitting program under the Clean Water Act, 
which regulates all discharges to surface water. It 
prohibits discharge of pollutants into waters of the 
United States unless EPA, a state, or a tribal 
government issues a special permit to do so. 

National Priorities List (NPL) The NPL is EPA's 
list of the most serious uncontrolled or abandoned 


hazardous waste sites identified for possible 
long-term cleanup under Superfund. Inclusion of a 
site on the list is based primarily on the score the 
site receives under the Hazard Ranking System 
(HRS). Money from Superfund can be used for 
cleanup only at sites that are on the NPL. EPA is 
required to update the NPL at least once a year. 

Natural Attenuation Natural attenuation is an 
approach to cleanup that uses natural processes to 
contain the spread of contamination from 
chemical spills and reduce the concentrations and 
amounts of pollutants in contaminated soil and 
groundwater. Natural subsurface processes, such 
as dilution, volatilization, biodegradation, 
adsorption, and chemical reactions with 
subsurface materials, reduce concentrations of 
contaminants to acceptable levels. An in situ 
treatment method that leaves the contaminants in 
place while those processes occur, natural 
attenuation is being used to clean up petroleum 
contamination from leaking underground storage 
tanks (LUST) across the country. 

Non-Point Source The term non-point source is 
used to identify sources of pollution that are 
diffuse and do not have a point of origin or that 
are not introduced into a receiving stream from a 
specific outlet. Common non-point sources are 
rain water, runoff from agricultural lands, 
industrial sites, parking lots, and timber 
operations, as well as escaping gases from pipes 
and fittings. 

Operation and Maintenance (O&M) O&M 

refers to the activities conducted at a site, 
following remedial actions, to ensure that the 
cleanup methods are working properly. O&M 
activities are conducted to maintain the 
effectiveness of the cleanup and to ensure that no 
new threat to human health or the environment 
arises. O&M may include such activities as 
groundwater and air monitoring, inspection and 
maintenance of the treatment equipment 
remaining on site, and maintenance of any 
security measures or institutional controls. 

Organic Chemical or Compound An organic 
chemical or compound is a substance produced by 


38 


animals or plants that contains mainly carbon, 
hydrogen, and oxygen. 

Permeability Permeability is a characteristic that 
represents a qualitative description of the relative 
ease with which rock, soil, or sediment will 
transmit a fluid (liquid or gas). 

Pesticide A pesticide is a substance or mixture of 
substances intended to prevent or mitigate 
infestation by, or destroy or repel, any pest. 
Pesticides can accumulate in the food chain and/or 
contaminate the environment if misused. 

Phenols A phenol is one of a group of organic 
compounds that are byproducts of petroleum 
refining, tanning, and textile, dye, and resin 
manufacturing. Low concentrations of phenols 
cause taste and odor problems in water; higher 
concentrations may be harmful to human health or 
the environment. 

Photoionization Detector (PID) A PID is a 

nondestructive detector, often used in conjunction 
with gas chromatography, that measures the 
change of signal as analytes are ionized by an 
ultraviolet lamp. The PID is also used to detect 
VOCs and petroleum hydrocarbons. 

Phytoremediation Phytoremediation is an 
innovative treatment technology that uses plants 
and trees to clean up contaminated soil and water. 
Plants can break down, or degrade, organic 
pollutants or stabilize metal contaminants by 
acting as filters or traps. Phytoremediation can be 
used to clean up metals, pesticides, solvents, 
explosives, crude oil, polyaromatic hydrocarbons, 
and landfill leachates. Its use generally is limited 
to sites at which concentrations of contaminants 
are relatively low and contamination is found in 
shallow soils, streams, and groundwater. 

Plasma High-Temperature Metals Recovery 

Plasma high-temperature metals recovery is a 
thermal treatment process that purges 
contaminants from solids and soils such as metal 
fumes and organic vapors. The vapors can be 
burned as fuel, and the metal fumes can be 
recovered and recycled. This innovative treatment 
technology is used to treat contaminated soil and 


groundwater. 

Plume A plume is a visible or measurable 
emission or discharge of a contaminant from a 
given point of origin into any medium. The term 
also is used to refer to measurable and potentially 
harmful radiation leaking from a damaged reactor. 

Point Source A point source is a stationary 
location or fixed facility from which pollutants are 
discharged or emitted; or any single, identifiable 
discharge point of pollution, such as a pipe, ditch, 
or smokestack. 

Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) PCBs are a 
group of toxic, persistent chemicals, produced by 
chlorination of biphenyl, that once were used in 
high voltage electrical transformers because they 
conducted heat well while being fire resistant and 
good electrical insulators. These contaminants 
typically are generated from metal degreasing, 
printed circuit board cleaning, gasoline, and wood 
preserving processes. Further sale or use of PCBs 
was banned in 1979. 

Polyaromatic Hydrocarbon (PAH) A PAH is a 
chemical compound that contains more than one 
fused benzene ring. They are commonly found in 
petroleum fuels, coal products, and tar. 

Pump and Treat Pump and treat is a general term 
used to describe cleanup methods that involve the 
pumping of groundwater to the surface for 
treatment. It is one of the most common methods 
of treating polluted aquifers and groundwater. 

Radioactive Waste Radioactive waste is any 
waste that emits energy as rays, waves, or streams 
of energetic particles. Sources of such wastes 
include nuclear reactors, research institutions, and 
hospitals. 

Radionuclide A radionuclide is a radioactive 
element characterized according to its atomic 
mass and atomic number, which can be artificial 
or naturally occurring. Radionuclides have a long 
life as soil or water pollutants. Radionuclides 
cannot be destroyed or degraded; therefore, 
applicable technologies involve separation, 
concentration and volume reduction, 
immobilization, or vitrification. See also 


39 


Solidification and Stabilization. 

Radon Radon is a colorless, naturally occurring, 
radioactive, inert gaseous element formed by 
radioactive decay of radium atoms. See also 
Radioactive Waste and Radionuclide. 

Release A release is any spilling, leaking, 
pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, 
discharging, injecting, leaching, dumping, or 
disposing into the environment of a hazardous or 
toxic chemical or extremely hazardous substance, 
as defined under RCRA. See also Resource 
Conservation and Recovery Act. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 
(RCRA) RCRA is a Federal law enacted in 1976 
that established a regulatory system to track 
hazardous substances from their generation to 
their disposal. The law requires the use of safe and 
secure procedures in treating, transporting, 
storing, and disposing of hazardous substances. 
RCRA is designed to prevent the creation of new, 
uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. 

Risk Communication Risk communication, the 
exchange of information about health or 
environmental risks among risk assessors, risk 
managers, the local community, news media and 
interest groups, is the process of informing 
members of the local community about 
environmental risks associated with a site and the 
steps that are being taken to manage those risks. 

Saturated Zone The saturated zone is the area 
beneath the surface of the land in which all 
openings are filled with water at greater than 
atmospheric pressure. 

Seismic Reflection and Refraction Seismic 
reflection and refraction is a technology used to 
examine the geophysical features of soil and 
bedrock, such as debris, buried channels, and 
other features. 

Semi-Volatile Organic Compound (SVOC) 

SVOCs, composed primarily of carbon and 
hydrogen atoms, have boiling points greater than 
200* C. Common SVOCs include PCBs and 
phenol. See also Polychlorinated Biphenyl. 


Site Assessment A site assessment is an initial 
environmental investigation that is limited to a 
historical records search to determine ownership 
of a site and to identify the kinds of chemical 
processes that were carried out at the site. A site 
assessment includes a site visit, but does not 
include any sampling. If such an assessment 
identifies no significant concerns, a site 
investigation is not necessary. 

Site Investigation A site investigation is an 
investigation that includes tests performed at the 
site to confirm the location and identity 
environmental hazards. The assessment includes 
preparation of a report that includes 
recommendations for cleanup alternatives. 

Sludge Sludge is a semisolid residue from air or 
water treatment processes. Residues from 
treatment of metal wastes and the mixture of 
waste and soil at the bottom of a waste lagoon are 
examples of sludge, which can be a hazardous 
waste. 

Slurry-Phase Bioremediation Slurry-phase 
bio-remediation, a treatment technology that can 
be used alone or in conjunction with other 
biological, chemical, and physical treatments, is a 
process through which organic contaminants are 
converted to innocuous compounds. Slurry-phase 
bioremediation can be effective in treating various 
semi-volatile organic carbons (SVOCs) and 
nonvolatile organic compounds, as well as fuels, 
creosote, pentachlorophenols (PCP), and PCBs. 
See also Polychlorinated Biphenyl and 
Semi-Volatile Organic Carbon. 

Soil Boring Soil boring is a process by which a 
soil sample is extracted from the ground for 
chemical, biological, and analytical testing to 
determine the level of contamination present. 

Soil Gas Soil gas consists of gaseous elements 
and compounds that occur in the small spaces 
between particles of the earth and soil. Such gases 
can move through or leave the soil or rock, 
depending on changes in pressure. 

Soil Washing Soil washing is an innovative 
treatment technology that uses liquids (usually 


40 


water, sometimes combined with chemical 
additives) and a mechanical process to scrub soils, 
removes hazardous contaminants, and 
concentrates the contaminants into a smaller 
volume. The technology is used to treat a wide 
range of contaminants, such as metals, gasoline, 
fuel oils, and pesticides. Soil washing is a 
relatively low-cost alternative for separating waste 
and minimizing volume as necessary to facilitate 
subsequent treatment. It is often used in 
combination with other treatment technologies. 
The technology can be brought to the site, thereby 
eliminating the need to transport hazardous 
wastes. 

Solidification and Stabilization Solidification 
and stabilization are the processes of removing 
wastewater from a waste or changing it chemically 
to make the waste less permeable and susceptible 
to transport by water. Solidification and 
stabilization technologies can immobilize many 
heavy metals, certain radionuclides, and selected 
organic compounds, while decreasing the surface 
area and permeability of many types of sludge, 
contaminated soils, and solid wastes. 

Solvent A solvent is a substance, usually liquid, 
that is capable of dissolving or dispersing one or 
more other substances. 

Solvent Extraction Solvent extraction is an 
innovative treatment technology that uses a 
solvent to separate or remove hazardous organic 
contaminants from oily-type wastes, soils, sludges, 
and sediments. The technology does not destroy 
contaminants, but concentrates them so they can 
be recycled or destroyed more easily by another 
technology. Solvent extraction has been shown to 
be effective in treating sediments, sludges, and 
soils that contain primarily organic contaminants, 
such as PCBs, VOCs, halogenated organic 
compounds, and petroleum wastes. Such 
contaminants typically are generated from metal 
degreasing, printed circuit board cleaning, 
gasoline, and wood preserving processes. Solvent 
extraction is a transportable technology that can 
be brought to the site. See also Polychlorinated 
Biphenyl and Volatile Organic Compound. 


Surfactant Flushing Surfactant flushing is an 
innovative treatment technology used to treat 
contaminated groundwater. Surfactant flushing of 
NAPLs increases the solubility and mobility of the 
contaminants in water so that the NAPLs can be 
biodegraded more easily in an aquifer or 
recovered for treatment aboveground. 

Surface Water Surface water is all water 
naturally open to the atmosphere, such as rivers, 
lakes, reservoirs, streams, and seas. 

Superfund Superfund is the trust fund that 
provides for the cleanup of significantly hazardous 
substances released into the environment, 
regardless of fault. The Superfund was established 
under Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) and 
subsequent amendments to CERCLA. The term 
Superfund is also used to refer to cleanup 
programs designed and conducted under CERCLA 
and its subsequent amendments. 

Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization 

Act (SARA) SARA is the 1986 act amending 
Comprehensive Environmental Response, 
Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) that 
increased the size of the Superfund trust fund and 
established a preference for the development and 
use of permanent remedies, and provided new 
enforcement and settlement tools. 

Thermal Desorption Thermal desorption is an 
innovative treatment technology that heats soils 
contaminated with hazardous wastes to 
temperatures from 200* to 1,000* F so that 
contaminants that have low boiling points will 
vaporize and separate from the soil. The vaporized 
contaminants are then collected for further 
treatment or destruction, typically by an air 
emissions treatment system. The technology is 
most effective at treating VOCs, SVOCs and other 
organic contaminants, such as PCBs, polyaromatic 
hydrocarbons (PAHs), and pesticides. It is 
effective in separating organics from refining 
wastes, coal tar wastes, waste from wood 
treatment, and paint wastes. It also can separate 
solvents, pesticides, PCBs, dioxins, and fuel oils 
from contaminated soil. See also Polyaromatic 


41 


Hydrocarbon, Polychlorinated Biphenyl, 
Semivolatile Organic Compound, and Volatile 
Organic Compound. 

Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) TPH 

refers to a measure of concentration or mass of 
petroleum hydrocarbon constituents present in a 
given amount of air, soil, or water. 

Toxicity Toxicity is a quantification of the degree 
of danger posed by a substance to animal or plant 
life. 

Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure 
(TCLP) The TCLP is a testing procedure used to 
identify the toxicity of wastes and is the most 
commonly used test for determining the degree of 
mobilization offered by a solidification and 
stabilization process. Under this procedure, a 
waste is subjected to a process designed to model 
the leaching effects that would occur if the waste 
was disposed of in a RCRA Subtitle D municipal 
landfill. See also Solidification and Stabilization. 

Toxic Substance A toxic substance is a chemical 
or mixture that may present an unreasonable risk 
of injury to health or the environment. 

Treatment Wall (also Passive Treatment Wall) 

A treatment wall is a structure installed 
underground to treat contaminated groundwater 
found at hazardous waste sites. Treatment walls, 
also called passive treatment walls, are put in 
place by constructing a giant trench across the 
flow path of contaminated groundwater and filling 
the trench with one of a variety of materials 
carefully selected for the ability to clean up 
specific types of contaminants. As the 
contaminated groundwater passes through the 
treatment wall, the contaminants are trapped by 
the treatment wall or transformed into harmless 
substances that flow out of the wall. The major 
advantage of using treatment walls is that they are 
passive systems that treat the contaminants in 
place so the property can be put to productive use 
while it is being cleaned up. Treatment walls are 
useful at some sites contaminated with chlorinated 
solvents, metals, or radioactive contaminants. 

Underground Storage Tank (UST) A UST is a 


tank located entirely or partially underground that 
is designed to hold gasoline or other petroleum 
products or chemical solutions. 

Unsaturated Zone The unsaturated zone is the 
area between the land surface and the uppermost 
aquifer (or saturated zone). The soils in an 
unsaturated zone may contain air and water. 

Vadose Zone The vadose zone is the area 
between the surface of the land and the aquifer 
water table in which the moisture content is less 
than the saturation point and the pressure is less 
than atmospheric. The openings (pore spaces) also 
typically contain air or other gases. 

Vapor Vapor is the gaseous phase of any 
substance that is liquid or solid at atmospheric 
temperatures and pressures. Steam is an example 
of a vapor. 

Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) A VOC is 
one of a group of carbon-containing compounds 
that evaporate readily at room temperature. 
Examples of volatile organic compounds include 
trichloroethane, trichloroethylene, benzene, 
toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylene (BTEX). These 
contaminants typically are generated from metal 
degreasing, printed circuit board cleaning, 
gasoline, and wood preserving processes. 

Volatilization Volatilization is the process of 
transfer of a chemical from the aqueous or liquid 
phase to the gas phase. Solubility, molecular 
weight, and vapor pressure of the liquid and the 
nature of the gas- liquid affect the rate of 
volatilization. 

Voluntary Cleanup Program (VCP) A VCP is a 
formal means established by many states to 
facilitate assessment, cleanup, and redevelopment 
of brownfields sites. VCPs typically address the 
identification and cleanup of potentially 
contaminated sites that are not on the National 
Priorities List (NPL). Under VCPs, owners or 
developers of a site are encouraged to approach 
the state voluntarily to work out a process by 
which the site can be readied for development. 
Many state VCPs provide technical assistance, 
liability assurances, and funding support for such 


42 


efforts. 


Wastewater Wastewater is spent or used water 
from an individual home, a community, a farm, or 
an industry that contains dissolved or suspended 
matter. 

Water Table A water table is the boundary 
between the saturated and unsaturated zones 
beneath the surface of the earth, the level of 
groundwater, and generally is the level to which 
water will rise in a well. See also Aquifer and 
Groundwater. 

X-Ray Fluorescence Analyzer An x-ray 
fluorescence analyzer is a self-contained, 
field-portable instrument, consisting of an energy 
dispersive x-ray source, a detector, and a data 
processing system that detects and quantifies 
individual metals or groups of metals. 


43 





































45 

















46 













Table C-2. Soil and Subsurface Sampling Tools 



> 
























































© 




























3 












T3 


T3 

•O 









A 

■D 



0 


T3 


■D 








£ 


2 

© 









2 

2 

2 


0 


2 


2 








© 


© 

© 









© 

© 

© 


— 



T3 









© 


© 

© 










© 



& 


— 

© 









C 


C 

c 













E 

(0 

co 


© 

a 

> 

n 

3 

© 

© 

.o 

© 

a 

>» 

.a 

T3 

CD 

© 

■o 

£ 

© 

A 

£ 

© 

A 

£ 

© 

A 

£ 

© 

A 

£ 

© 

© 

© 

© 

n 

3 

© 

n 

> 

A 

A 

£ 

© 

3 

© 

A 

>» 

JO 

3 

© 

A 

>» 

A 


T3 

£ 

© 

■a 

£ 

© 


t3 

£ 

© 

T> 

£ 

© 

A 

£ 

© 

T3 

£ 

© 

3 

© 

X) 

>. 

A 

3 

« 

A 

>% 

A 

3 

© 

A 

>, 

A 




a 

8 

© 

-* 

n 

8 

© 

a 

© 

© 

-Q 

© 

© 

-O 

© 

© 

a 

© 

© 

-O 

© 

© 

A 

> 

© 

-* 

A 

8 

© 

© 

A 

© 

-O 

B 

© 

-O 

e 


© 

© 

A 

© 

© 

A 


© 

© 

ro 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

A 

2 

re 

a 

2 

© 

A 

2 





“ 



>N 


>* 

>N 


— 

CL 

> 

CL 

CL 


>> 

>* 






a 

a 

a 







© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

— 

— 

© 

— 

= 


© 

© 


© 

© 



sr 

=x 

XE 




i 

J 

* 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

E 

i 

* 

E 

i 

i 


E 

E 


E 

E 

E 

E 

i 

i 

i 




CO 

co 

CO 

© 

CO 

CO 

co 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 


CO 

CO 












© 

.2 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 


© 

© 


® 

© 

© 

2 

© 

© 

© 




A 

tr 


tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

r 

C 

tr 

tr 


tr 

tr 


tr 

■tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 

tr 




© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 


© 

© 


© 

© 

© 








CL 

Q. 

CL 

a 

Q. 

CL 

a. 

Q. 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 


CL 

CL 


CL 

CL 

CL 

a 







O 

O 

O 

o 

O 

O 

o 

O 

o 

O 

O 

O 

O 

O 


O 

O 


O 

O 

o 

o 

















w_ 

k_ 


k_ 















CL 




a. 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 

CL 

Cl 

CL 

CL 


CL 

Ql 


CL 

CL 

CL 

a 

a 

a 

a 
































O 

O 

o 

o 

o 

O 

O 

O 

c 

O 

O 

O 

o 

o 


O 

o 


o 

o 

5 

o 

o 

o 

5 




CO 

co 

(0 

CO 

co 

C0 

<0 

c/> 

<0 

CD 

co 

CO 

CO 

CO 


CO 

CO 


CO 

CO 

co 

CO 

CO 

CO 

co 


0) 




























a 




























E 




























CD 




























V) 
























































<D 




























a 


© 


© 

© 


© 



© 

© 



© 

© 


© 

© 



© 



© 

© 





> 


> 

> 


> 



> 

> 



> 

> 


> 

> 



> 



> 

> 



V) 


CD 


CO 

CO 


CO 



CO 

CO 



CO 

co 


co 

CO 



CO 







0 


c 


c 

c 


c 


© 

c 

c 



c 

c 


c 

c 



c 



c 

c 



u 


© 

© 

© 

© 


© 


© 

© 

© 


© 

© 


© 

© 



© 



© 

© 




& 

CO 

c 

© 

& 

& 


& 

CO 


& 

& 


CO 

$ 

9- 


& 

s- 


CO 

s- 

CO 

CO 

& 

& 

CO 


a) 

> 


© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

© 

c 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 


© 

© 

© 

© 


c 

© 

© 

© 

c 

© 

c 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

c 

© 


♦— 


CD 


CD 

CD 


CD 



CD 

CD 



CD 

CD 


CD 

CD 



CD 



CD 

CD 



CD 


c 


c 

c 


c 

© 


c 

c 


© 

c 

C 


c 

c 


© 

c 



c 

c 





© 


© 

© 


© 



© 

© 



© 

© 


© 

© 



© 







0) 




k- 


*- 


CO 

— 

v 



to 







to 

h_ 



k_ 




cr 


■O 


■a 

A 


A 

© 

o 

T> 

■O 

o 

© 

T3 

t> 


T3 

XD 


© 

■O 

© 

© 

■O 

t> 

© 




2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

_J 

2 

2 

2 

2 


2 

2 


2 

2 


—J 

2 

-1 

-J 

2 

2 

© 

_i 


■D w 




























C O 




























3 5 


X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 


X 

X 





X 

X 


X 







(0 

- § 




























o > 



























<D 




























2 

0 


X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 


X 



X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 


w 




























c 




























0 




























*-> 




























03 




























«-■ 




+£ 
























c 




CD 
























0 




t 


















© 

> 






E 




(0 


















o 






3 




o 





CD 













A 

<0 















c 


© 


© 

© 


to 







© 

© 




</> 

C 

© 

3 

g 

c 

r 

o 

© 

M 

T3 

O 

A 

0 

2 

o» 

c 

o 

o 

H 

© 

C 

« 

E 

© 

o 

c 

w 

> 

T3 

< 

o> 

c 

£ 

i © 

« E 

tr © 

a: x 

w © 

o i 

© 

o 

a 

T3 

3 

2 

o 

© 

CD 

C 

k_ 

Q 

« 

c 

o 

■o 

o 

© 

hm 

© 

CD 

3 

< 

E 

© 

C/3 

i 

o 

CO 

■O 

o 

5 

© 

2 

CD 

C 

a 

Q 

a 

c 

o 

E 

© 

5 

>* 

© 

© 

o 

(J 

CD 

c 

© 

JC 

O 

3 

CO 

a 

c 

© 

tr 

gj 

LL <o 

A © 

.3 cd 

CD 

c 

D 

o 

c 

u 

L. 

© 

CD 

2 

o 

CO 

TJ 

c 

ra 

♦-» 

J3 

3 

H 

C 

© 

CL 

o 

*© 

? 

c 

ra 

_ $ 

"c c 

2 '£ 

<0 h- 
CL t? 

— © 

© y 
$ .5 

E S 

■D 

0 

£ 

© 

2 

£ 

10 

3 

QL 

o 

© 

© 

© 

E 

fi 

© 

c 

© 

0. 

© 

c 

jO 

© 

§ 

c 

© 

> 

nd-Held Methods 

CO 

k. 

© 

CD 

© 

k. 

o 

O 

CD 

C 

5 

c 

© 

CO 

C 

o 

o 

a 

CO 

CL 

O 

O 

w 

u. 

m 

CD 

2 

o 

CO 

T3 

c 

m 

A 

D 

H 

C 

« 

a 

O 

« 

_c 

75 

5 

c c 

9 B 

2 H 

Q. n 
— o 
n .a 

5 » 

.5 S 

M 

© 

a 



“ 



h o 

k_ 


o 


o 

o 

O 3 

o 

a 

jC 

r: a 

— 

o 

k_ 

© 

3 

o 

O 

a 

JC 

a a 

3 



Q 

o 

o 

Q Q 

Q 

o 

X 

—> 

a. 

x 

c/) < 

CO 

co 

H 

»- (0 

Q 

O 

Q 

X 

< 

X 

CO 

<0 

►- 

»- co 

K 


47 
















































Table C-3. Groundwater Sampling Tools 


Technique/I n*tru mentation 

Contam Inants 1 

Relative Coat per Sample 

Sample Quality 

Portable Groundwater Sampling Pumps 

Bladder Pump 

SVOCs, PAHs. 

metals 

Mid-range expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Gas-Oriven Piston Pump 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Most Expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered by sampling 

Gas-Driven Displacement Pumps 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered by sampling 

Gear Pump 

SVOCs. PAHs, 
metals 

Mid-range expensive 

Liquid properties may be altered 

Inertial-Lift Pumps 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Submersible Centrifugal Pumps 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Most expensive 

Liquid properties may be altered 

Submersible Helical-Rotor Pump 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Most expensive 

Liquid properties may be altered 

Suctlon-Uft Pumps (peristaltic) 

SVOCs, PAHs, 
metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties may be altered 

Portable Grab Samplers 

Bailers 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties may be altered 

Pneumatic Depth-Specific 

Samplers 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Mid-range expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Portable In Situ Groundwater Samplers/Sensors 

Cone Penetrometer Samplers 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Direct Drive Samplers 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Hydropunch 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Mid-range expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Fixed In Situ Samplers 

Multilevel Capsule Samplers 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Mid-range expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be 
unaltered 

Multiple-Port Casings 

VOCs, SVOCs, 

PAHs, metals 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 

Passive Multilayer Samplers 

VOCs 

Least expensive 

Liquid properties will probably be unaltered 


Bold Most commonly used field techniques 
VOCs Volatile Organic Carbons 
SVOCsSemivolatile Organic Carbons 
PAHs Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons 


48 






































Table C-4. Sample Analysis Technologies 




10 « 

«-> 

~ © 

C Q 
10 
3 
O 


c 

i 

© 

o 

Q. 

a 

< 


a 


a © 


» « 

o c 

o < 


© 

> 


« 


a 


c 

o 


Q 


O 


i • 

j * 


o 

CO 


* 


10 


3 

O' 


C 



C 

° 


c 

E 

3 

is 


■O 

© 

M 

3 

CT 

® 


£ 

© 


TJ 

TD 

< 


2 

® 


TJ 

® 

© 

3 

>* 

« 

3 

© 

D 


® 

— •- 
© © 
CO c 
® ® 
_j a 
X 
® 


a 

a 

a 


2 


c 

5 

o 

T3 

If 

® 

CD 

? ^ 
O w 
3 © 

c E 

£ o 

i i» 

© £ 

V) ® 

co a 
_J <0 


•o 

® 

jfi 

3 

or 

® 


co 

c 

o 

a 

■6 

■O 

< 


© 

© O 
3 CO 


(A V) 
CO C 
® ® 
_j a 


E 

a 

a 


© 

2 


* 

£ 

® 

E 


co 

c 

o 

a 

*6 

■o 

< 


® t - 
© O 

3 CO 

^ s 

ra -O 


® ® 
O) > 

® C 

V ® 
■o a 
— x 

5 ® 


E 

a 

a 


2 

® 

5 


>* 

© 

Y 

X 

TD 

• 

O 

Is 
© .2 
«s 

© E 

a id 


® 

> 


S 2 

3 (0 


© -2 
3 ® 
© 

D 


o 

2 


a 

a 

a 


© 

2 


2 

lb 

© © 

*0 c 

< E 

o 2 

n 

< <o 


® 

> 


■O >, 

® £ 
© o 

;i 

re a 
3 re 


© 

> 


o 

2 


-O 

a 

a 


re 

© 

2 


■o 

© 

a 

3 

O 

O 

© 

£ 

o 

3 

•o 

c 


E ^ 

c o 

® a 
a (O 


o 

z 


2 

© 


T3 

« 


O 

2 


© 

re 

© 

2 


re 

o 

CD 

5 

© 


T3 

£ 


© 

© 

> 


2 

© 


o 

re 

o 

£3 

CO 


© © 
re c 
© © 
-i a 


E 

a 

a 


© 

2 


>» 

re 

a 


T3 

© 


§ 

*© 

re 

c 

o 

a 

■5 

T3 

< 


© 

C 


3 

>* 


E 

a 

a 


I 

< 

a 


■o 

© 

o 

3 

T5 

£ 


■o 

© 


or 

© 


2 

*© 


JD 

73 

< 


*o 

© 


o 

©* 

re 

■6 

© 

E 

E 


© © 
re c 
© ® 
_j a 


E 

a 

a 


O 

o 

> 


© 

A 


o 

w 

O 

a 


o 

co 


*o 

© 

Jm 

3 

CT 

® 


3 

*© 

re 

c 

o 

■a 

■6 

T3 

< 


>» 

«- 

o 

re 

o 

a 

03 


•o 

« 

© 

3 

© 

a 

c 

re 

O 


© 

> 

© © 
re c 
© © 
_j a 


E 

a 

a 


O ^ 1 

o 9 < 
> « “• 


© 

X 

o 

'C 

© 

E 

r 

o 

re 

U 


E 

« 

a 

O 


o 

z 


© 

a 


•o 

© 

E 

E 


CO c 

9 © 

_j a 


E 

a 

a 


O 

O 

> 


i 

o 

© 

© 

O 

c 

.2 

If 

n 

co re 

.T -c 


o 

Z 


■o 

© 


© 

a 


-1 


■o 

© 

E 

E 


© 

> 

© © 
re c 
« © 
_j a 


E 

a 

a 


O 

O 

> 


a 

x 

ID 


O 

z 


T3 

© 


© 

a 


S 2 

s • 


■O 

© 

E 

E 


© 

- > 
© © 
re c 
© © 
_i a 


E 

a 

a 


© Q 
> <0 


© 

© 

D 

c 

.2 

a - 

- *o 

*1 
O TJ 
O £ 

ft 


o 

z 


© - 
© 2 


• o 

3 ® 


© 

> 

© © 
CO c 

9 © 

-« a 


E 

a 

a 


O 

O 

> 


c 

.2 

re 

V 

x 

O 

© 

o 

© 

3 

CO 

o 


co 

O 


CT 

© 


3 


c 

o 

a 

•o 

•O 

< 


10 ^ 

© Y 
© 2 
3 « 

^ 5 

* -2 
3 ® 


© • 

08 > 

® c 
V © 

T3 a 
a x 

2 © 


o 

o 

?* 
o a- 
o 


© 

O 

o 

> 


o 

c 

3 

o 

• 


£ E 

*- o 

re • 
© a 

Z co 


© 

> 


© ^ 
© 2 
3 re 

^ S 


© « 

o> > 

2 S 
5 c 
v « 

■o a 
^ x 
2 © 


O 

o 

o 


a 

a 


« 0 

O o 

5 > 

> co 


• 

E 

o 

fa 

o 

9 

a 

CO 


a 

o 

2 

c 

o 


49 














































TJ 

0 


T) 

< 


73 & 
© O 
© 2 
3 (0 

* O 
3 2 


© © 
O) > 

n ^ 
(0 c 

V © 
■o a 
- X 

2 « 


a 

CL 

CL 


© Q 

o o 

5 > 

> CO 


(0 

a: 

LU 

co 

CL 


e 

t5 

© 

a. 

co 

c 

a 

E 

« 

a: 


■O 

© 

’5 

O' 

© 


© 

c 

o 

o 

•O 

< 


© C- 
© O 
= © 
^ s 

© ■£ 
3 


© © 

O) > 

S 5 
2 c 
*r © 
■o Q. 

9 X 
2 © 


o 

o 

°- E 

T 3. 
o Q- 
o 


© Q 

£ o 
2 > 
> CO 


Q. 

o 

o 

© 

e 

o 

• 

a 

CO 

■o 

© 


O' 

© 


■O >s 
® n 

© O 
3 © 
^ O 
« -2 
3 2 
© 


© © 
O) > 


o 

o 

°- E 
7 Q. 
o °- 
o 


o 

o 

> 


.2 

£ 

o 

in 

n 

< 

«*•» 

o> 

c 


© 

o 

CO 


■O 

© 


O' 

© 


o 

9 


o 

© 


© 

o 

© 

o 

9 

© 


© © 
o> > 
c © 
© c 
*r © 

O Q. 
9 X 

2 © 


E 

CL 

a. 


© 

O 

O 

> 


>» 

CL 

o 

o 

© 

e 

o 

© 

a 

co 


•o 

© 


cr 

© 


■O 

© 

© 

C 3 
.1 © 

© 

© C "O 
3 © Q) 
O 2 
>» - 
= > C 

ro X 
3 2 
© c 
o 
a 
© 


2 c 
*r © 
•o a. 


a 

CL 

CL 


. © 
© Q 

g O 

5 > 

> co 


© 

© 

> 


T3 

© 


© 

9 

c ■ 
© ' 
« » 

O 

2 

o 

X) 

© 


© © 
o> > 

2 c 

*r © 

■O Q. 
9 X 
2 © 


jO 

Q. 

CL 


. © 
© Q 

u o 

5 > 

> CO 


^ © 

?I 

Q. c 

2 -c 

o» 1 
O > 


© 

3 

O 

© 

o 

c 

© 

E 

■o 

© 

© 


c 

© 

o 

2 

3 

2 

2 

© 

9 

© 

o 

9 

O 

© 

k_ 

o 

o 

© 

9 

C 

o 

© 

>» 

CO 

3 

Li- 

« 

o 

© 

o 

© 

T3 


■o 

© 


c 

o 

9 

■6 

o 

< 


■O fK 
® n 
© 2 
3 © 

^ 5 

© -3 
3 2 


© © 
o> > 

2 c 

*r © 

■o a 

9 X 
2 © 


9 

CL 

a. 


X 


© 

o 

o 

> 


£ 

© 

E 

o 

o 

x: 

CL 

O 

t. 

o 

© 

CL 

CO 

© 

w 

> 

I 

> 

D 


*0 

© 

= 

3 

O' 

© 


© 

c 

o 

9 

■6 

T3 

< 


© 2 

3 re 

^ o 
© -3 

3 2 


© © 
O) > 

© ^ 
2 c 
*r © 
■o a. 


9 

CL 

CL 


o 

O 

> 


© 

o 

c 

© 

o 

© 

© 

L_ 

o 

3 


> 

D 


© 

> 


2 

© 


£ 

o 

© 

k. 

o 

A 


O 

2 


9 

a 

CL 


- © 
© Q 

§> 

> CO 


© 

> 


2 

© 


■o 

© 


© © 
© c 
© © 
-J CL 


E 

CL 

a. 


© * 2 

§§i 

^ CO 


© 

CD 


o 

re 

© 

cc 2 
_ © 
© CL 
O © 

& i 
© (/) 
9 0 

O H 


CT 

© 


2 


© 

c 

o 

9 

"6 

■O 

< 


■O 

© 

© 

c 3 
” © 

T3 9 
© 

w C 2 

= 3 « 

3 O 

-I 

9 

© 


© 

> 

© © 
re c 
© © 
_J CL 
X 
© 


E 

CL 

Ol 


o 5 2 

5>l 

^ co 


© 

o 


© 

>» 

re 

© 

© 

© 

o 

c 

3 

E 


© 

© 

k. 

o> 

T5 

C 

© 


c 

© 

© 

2 

a. 

re 

9 

>» 

© 

E^ 

© 

•o 

o 9 


E 

° - ^ 
O w "o 

s?? 
c O X 


o o 

c e 


ir 9 © 

O n E 

© o o 

9 > « 

2 E ^ 
o © o 
> co o. 


CL 

E 

© 

© 

k_ 

© 

Q. 


3 

O 

E 

© 

© 

c 

o 

9 

T3 

T3 

© 


« 

2 

o 

9 

© 

3 

0^ 

Sfl 

© 

© 

c 

© 


© 

E 


3 

O 

tim 

© 

E 

3 

£ 

© 

© ^ 
© CO 
© CO 

2 ^ 
’5 

5- ^ 

” 2 
© 3 
. © 

S 3 
© 

O) "O 

5 S 

- E 

CL C 

« o> 

© c 

® s- 

o " 

11 

o ^ 

2 2 

2 ^ 

® a 

® n 

f 5 

« -Q 

= is 

E o 

S 5 
® £ 
£ ® 

— 0> 

«5 m 

® 9 

a q. 

g E 

c ® 

2 co 


© o 
o o 
o > 
> co 


50 































Exhibit D-l. Cleanup Technologies for Landfill and Illegal Dump Sites 


a> 

• PM 

WD 

O 

ft © 

* s 

’-3 u 

a « 















52 












w 

8 





■> - 

i "v. • 

.. . 'v.;'- ' =■' 

JW'. ..2 

•s 

s 

I 3 


« - • 





O 

''t 

fee 

C4 

O g 

o 2 
r- u 

(N <U 

ex 


^ 2 
E x 
H 5 


C/3 

c 

o 

C/3 

C/3 

£ 

<u 

<o 

> 


-o 

§ ~ 

. ^3 

3 .£ 

U 


2L 

o 


e 

bJO O 
„ C <-> 

2P ‘C <u 
3 X 
"O 

4- c 

o p E 

*— r\ 

C 


c£ 


<u 2 


.2 X ^ 

2 2 8 

M 

<D 

o ^ ^ 


a- c 
a 2 
aj .2 


a 

<£ <u 
<4- W X) 

^ r- w 

M 4-( c/3 

~ ^ 2 

£ O £ 

>> § c 

+2 .2 o 

——« w • 

• •—« • »—« 

O oo cfl 
fl O > 
e-* CL cd 

■a | 

oo O 
O u 

cx — 

•% c 
T3 3 
4-> J- 3 

j5« cr 

2 o- <u 

3 « l - 

u Q 3 

c 4 J *3 
<u 2 u 

2 8 £ 


o <-• 

«* 8 
OJ 4-. 

x 'x 

4-1 3 


>4 

3 

E 

CO 

3 

<u 


c 

o 


o 

X 

<u 

bJQ 

c 

c 


cd 


3 

is 

o 

O. ~0 

oo <u 

§ a 

u ~ 

h a* 

T3 C 

<U C4 

<D X 

*d bO 

’S 5 
c 2 
o 

o x 


T5 

4) 

— X 
cd -a 
co £ 

o c 

a r 

oo bO 

5 ^ 

>4 <D 

4— 4-J 

•— 00 
• — 3 

X £ 

a .£ 

<D cd 

o ts 
o 

>4 l_ 

•- ,2 

c ^ 

3 oo 

1 | 

o o 


<D <D 

t§ 

3 >> 

£ ~c 

^ o 

2 >4 

cd c 
£ | 
fc 


3 

O 

U] 


O 

3 


C 
3 
u, 

3 

oo <L) 

C h 

2 x 

2 ^ 

o 

2 « 

3 g 

£ x 


<u 

> 

.1 2 

"O C/2 

2 X 

, <U 

b *-* 

o * 

>4 

X 

X X 

o —‘ 

o2 c 

15 « 
SS 00 
O 3 

& * 

•3 "8 

x x 

D -a 
CO p 
C u 
1) T3 

2 c 

X 3 


■g 

J? | 

-4 J 

g iS ,cg *5 
U S I H 


o 

£ 


c 

3 

C 
• *-* 

E 

3 

4 —> 

c 

c 

o 


o 

x 

G 

D 

04 

00 


a 




4VJ 




. g ’o 

: If 

<s 2 


< 

CL, 

w 

c 

3 


3 


O 


~a 

<u 

-*-* 

3 

c 


3 X 

c -8 

8l 

00 ~n 

> > 

2 0 

I ^ 

oi 3 


CO 

4> 

■— 

DC 

3 O 

C/2 *C 

4» 

X o» 

W H 


3 

CO 

O 

C co 

•2 5 

3 0) 

> 

^3 (/} 
o u-i 
X <«r 

tu O 


53 




















JZ L- 

~ o 


u 

O 

<u 

Q- 

u 

s- 

3 

>5 

e 

JZ 

o 


P o 
S O 
x o 

O 

U 

m 

" G 

£ S 

3 c 

0) 

X) 

o 

ON 

<D 

4-* 

03 

o 

JO 

> 


o o 

&S 

c/5 

1 

> 1 
rp <u 

c* 1 

o 

w 


i— 

3 

'o 

<4- 

CL O 

3 

'o 


W) 

O 

c/5 

o 

3 <N 

>> 

> -5 

c/d 


o - 'a: . 

■*-' O t/2 

C 55 .. 

n O >* e 


~o 

<U 


o 

3 

.u 


£ £ J 


o 


<*- 5 

o g 

<u -a 
D- £ 
>~> cd 


<u 

cl 


a> 

JZ 


2 O JZ 
E c/5 


-£ "d 
J2 c 

•3 D — '3_, 

u > £ £ o c 

«) (« *3 o ca 


c 

Ofi 

^ -i-; 

-rt T3 

w <u 
52 >> 

C/5 fs 

<u .2 
O CL 

§ e 
Cl iu 


o —: 

g o 

% o £ 
o IS o 

3 


o 

ON 

^-H 

</* 


u 
O (U 


<u 


u- 

<o e 
cl E 


c 

3 

G 


3 

•*-> 

c 


<u 

e? 

jd 

o £ 
jz £ 
.W> o 

JZ <u 
u 52 

£ 3 

« 8 
.£ -O 

o g 

£ g 


"d 

<u 

U fl) 

’3 .o 

O' TJ 
D JZ on 

i g s 

C J= p 

D c/5 L« 

«> 3°- 

W)"S .g 

• £ £ E 

N -P 
'% J; CL 


X 

o 


o 
c o 


<D 

•*—> 

C/D 

O 

o 

4—> 

o 


3 

u 

4—> 

c 

O 

o 

c 

o 

o 


(J 

c 


o £ 'g 

2 g N 

3 feb § -2 
O J-T’c 2 

c t S c 

E c ’3 <tc 

Cd 3 C 4 ) 


<u 

C/5 "O 

Id '£ 

3 

£ >5 

2 u 



— ^ e 
aoo 

2 -a -a 

■3 3 2 

C T3 3 

<D • i—< T3 


54 
















— 




i-\r, 


m 


(N 


O 

<N 


C 

o 


^ cl 


<D 

DO X 

V—. 4—* 

3 C 
w ^ w C3 

5S § <u 3 

O -rt _C O' 

C <D 
. <u c w 

t: a o ^ id 

O O o* « C 

co T 3 3 > cd 


co 


u 


c 

o 

4 —I 

3 

u 
*—< 

C 

<D 

O 

C 

o 

o 






_ 7 • '•,.* » 


..uv-...i 



m 


c 

0 


O u. 

in « o 


t x 
O CO 03 
CL 4> c 

“g‘1 

x X 

u X 
c 3 


c 

3 


2 e 


W D< w td cd 


CO 

Id 

w 

G 

E 

>% 

> 

td 

<u 
x 
«—» 
cd 
G 


G 


^ n w 
co O c 

3 # a 5 

« &<j „ 

■° O >; ° 
~ x C 
2 <o 3 

c _ o 
c •£ j- 
cd ■— 2 
u £ E 


c 

o 

4—i 

cd 

o 

Cl <l> 
co X) 

C — 
03 5 

u cd 

„ H ° 

o — ^ 

c/5 .5 .2 

w w 

c s. — 

o-.„ 
jd 

c l_ 
X a) 
o X 

X) ? 

£ & 

o o 

~ o 

cd «-> 

<u i£ 

> co 

cd o 

x a 


3 

E 

E 

o 

CJ 

c 

o 

o 


C 

_ _ _» 


<u 

> 

• *“< 

CO 

c 

8 . 

X 

<u 




u .2 

O 2 

K> d) 

£ s 


f y> 


00 

c 

x 

Xi 

E 

u 

C/5 

Lm 

.O 


<u 

> 

o 

E 

<L> 


•v - 




CO 

co rz 
<L) •tS 
o CO 

2 x 

a. u 

_i co 

13 % 

% ° 
x -a 
2 « 

£ | 

3 > 
> ^ 
> o 

-4/ X 

<4 <D 


X 

CO 4Ti 

>1 cd 19 

x £ o 

2 (u c 

c x ■- 

c a § 

2 ”1 x 

c p ^ 

S O 60 
C X c 

o x 

O DO 3 

c 


<u 

N 


<u 

X 


cj ‘C 
.2 3 
3 X 

S a 

Ct* cd 
X 
00 C 
3 o 2 


CO 

o 

E 

00 

c 


<u 

■*—» 
03 

c 

E 

3 

o 

u 


o 

£ 


CO 

<d ^z: 

o c 

2 <D 


C3 • 

<U o 

O CO 


3 0 

X CO >, 

C 0 J- 
c3 DO O 
C G 
•3 -2 c 

E >, o 

I S3 

o £ o 

O X CO 


2 B 

3 o 
CL L> 
O C 

CO • — 

L_ >, 52 

o x £ 

> (U 


<D 


2 CO 

0 g> 


CO 

DO 

d> 'o 
X C/5 

2 2 

<u 

^t- c 

o .2 

w 

co cr3 

§ .2 

2" a. 
c g- 
x 

o 

<u ,0 


o 

'S 

3 

00 

u 

O 

X 

c 

3 

CO 

3 

U 


O 

>4 

CL) 

•c 

> 

<u 

-o 



<U 3 X 

X *3 X 

P CL S 

C <D O 

CO CO CO 


T* 03 
> 
G 


G 

co 


03 

JZ 


£ P x 




CL 


C 

3 

C 

E 

3 

■*—> 

c 

o 

o 


X 

So 22 

| 8 
jd g 

G 2 

O co 

0 3 
ON c 

03 

O C 

U-, ^ 

o 

§ § 
<N 0 
-X O 

co O 
<U •- 

3 3 

2 2? 
O ° 
CL <D 

id 2 


c « 

S <g 

3 


X 

<D 


o 

<0 

<-> 

'co 

c 

o 

X 

u 


o 2 

P CO 


3 


O 

O 

O 

Lh 

3 


>s 

CO 

«-> 

3 

O 

E 


3 


o 

J 


<0 

1 - 


CO 

8 g 

3 i3 

^ 2 

P 3 

CO O" 

(U <D 

W> oei 

X 

J2 x 

to 6J 

"O 3 

g 2 

03 •*—* 


<u 

CL 

<u 

X 

c 

3 

U 

iP 

u 

X 

£ 

3 

x 

o 

00 aj 
E •- 


3 

<D 

X 


co 


:a| 
< H 


00 

a 

• «H 

X 

£ 


o 

C/3 


c 

o 


3 


B 

E O 
a> to 

X u 

H Q 


55 

















m 


‘■■ 


x 

<D 


G 

o 


^LT 

o 


<U —I 


3 03 

c CQ 

U 

Oh 


C 

3 

o 


<u 


*> . 3 

03 X 


3 

4—4 

c 

o 

o 


s : x 

x o 

£ -5 


c 

3 


O 

03 

<u 
o 


X • 

o 


o 


c 
o 
’•*—> 
cd 
€ 
o 

ex . 

03 05 

S to 

2 g 

+-> sJ 


^ cd 



O -O — 


•s 

0 

<U 

s 

3 

cr 

<D 

u 

Id 

C/5 

O 

3 

3 

X - 1 

E 

0 

f \ 

3 

CT 

<U 

u 

aa 

c 

'c 

0 

3 

<u 

i_ 

£ 
-*— » 

C/5 

aa 

c 

4— 

3 

0 

X 

"Hh 

C/5 

0> 

■*—» 
cd 

CL 

C/5 

X 

<D 

X 

3 

0 

G 

-a 

<u 

u 

E 

X 

■w 



3 

JZ 

G 


3 

<u 

0 

0 

3 

*c2 


•3 

O 

w 

3 

13 

O 

4- 

C4- 

0 


Sd 


> "5 


3 


r— 

a. 


ex 


<U 


0 

0 


G 

w 

03 

G 

IU 

1—4 

*8 

CQ 

y 

3 

3 

X 

CT 

G 

1) 

G 

£ 

X 

0 

<u 

<£ 

w 

G 

as 

X 

<U 

E 

OS 

c 

Os 

3 

IU 

Os 

O 

G 

<u 

X 

'3 

X 

G 

cr 

4—4 

3 

<u 

03 

X 

<u 

<U 

4—4 

03 

G 

<u 

3 

On 

0 

£ 

On 

X 

03 

3 

ON 

<u 

On 

03 

l— 

O 

On 

O 

X 

On 

4—4 

3 

c3 

<U 

G 

N 

X 

<u 

3 

w 

c 

X 

4—» 

'G 

G 

<D 

c 

£ 

E 


03 

G 


c 

o 



h - 1 <u 

^ o £ 
o o 03 « . 
~ o 2 XI 

2 - o2 

• u ^ 

O <D cd <L> 

•“ ex aa b 




C/5 

3 

£ 

X 

D 

w 

cd 

o 


> 

D 

<+- 

o 

c 

o 


<U 

N 


03 

cd 

aa 

, i 


X) 

x 


05 

aa 03 


<u 

X 


03 

c 
cd 
g 
cd <-• 

* 5 * O 
03 o 

os ao 

3 
O 
<U 

3 


03 

<U 

oi 

3 

3 

O 


03 

C 

o 


cr -q 

3 • — 


<U 


> 

o 

r~ >- 

H ex 


>% — 
x 

■3 u 

2 ^ 
x g 

.5? s 

_c ^ 
O ,<u 

~ t 

X <u 

.2P 3 


>> 

3 

E 

i_ 

<U 
•*—> 

cd 

£ 

<U 

w 

<>3 

£ 


j3 

o 

> 

>» 

3 

£ 

C/5 

U 

O 

> 

03 

03 

<U 

c 

<u 

> 


o 

,5 

x 

g- 

<u 


M— G 

o £ 


S 

o 

o 

o 

c 

3 

O 

c 

O 

•4—> 

3 

X 

’x 

o 

£ 

£ 

<U 

x 


£ 03 

X <u 

>n '3b 

3 Q 

o 
c 

X 
o 
<u 


03 

W 

03 

O 

U 

4—' 

c 

<u 

E 

3 

<u 

u 

4—4 

<U 

u 


aa 

c 

4—* 

<u 

ex 

E 

o 

<u 


<u 

aa 

3 

& 

4—4 

03 

X 

C 

3 

aa 

c 


c 

S 3 

^ x 
cr •*—» 

£ >- 
*-4 IU 

>4 X 

3 aa 

£ x 


- x 

>4 C 

aa 3 

Ur HU 

<D ffi 

£ 03 

(1) w 

<*-■ £ 
o £ 

<u £ 

03 <U 

3 .in 

3 3 

£ O' 

J) <u 

X 1—4 


>4 

£ 

<u 

L-. 

3 

cr 

cd 

<D 

CO 

u 


>4 

cd 

• 

3 

0 

(U 

X 

E 

03 

03 

3 

<U 

aa 

1 

.hi 


3 

(T 

s 

<U 

03 

G 

G 

03 

O 

<5 

X 

N 

3 


3 

X 

O 

• ^ 

X 

£ 

0 

X 


4_! 

c 

<U 

E 

3 

£ 


C/5 

u 

o 

> 


_N 

•5 

- a 

o 


C4-4 

0 



G 

3 

G 


■*— * 

O 

_o 

> 

c 

3 

c 

Id 

4-4 

X 

X 

D 

X 

0 

X 

2 

3 

■*— » 

• ^ 


(U 


*-> 

__ 

X 


c 

>4 


G 

0 

X 

>4 

X 

O 

*•*-» 

cd 

0 

0 

0 

G 

X 

G 


E 

>4 

<u 

4—4 

3 

-o 

cd 

Ur 

3 

aa 

G 

X 

IU 


0> 

03 

03 03 

4> 3 

a ^ 

S.-S 


x o 


T3 

C 


>4 

c 


3 3 

£ >* 
o - 

N 3 


<U 

> 


c 
o c 

X D 
O 3 

2 x 

- S 


W 3 OX 


X -3 


o 

Q 


o 

o 


X 

o 

aa Oh 

c X 
o x 
aa 


o 

3 

<D 


3 

X 


G 


_o 

(U 

*4—4 

3 

X 

4—4 

X 

X 

■a 

0 

3 

<u 

2 

X 

X 

H 

4—4 

, 

X 

X 

IU 

<0 

> 

w 

cd 

.£ 

£ 

— 

X 

0 

<u 

3 

X 

£ 

_>4 

3 

03 

c 

Id 

X 

0 

G 

■w 

iU 

CJ 

4-4 

O 

X 

cd 

£ 


c 

_o 

4-4 

3 

C 

X 

E 

o 

o 

c 


J— 

aa 


<u 

3 ^ 

3 © 

u c 


o 

x 

'x 

o 

1_ 

<u 


03 

3 

O 

3 

G 

1 

W 

§ 

o 


(U 

4—4 

3 

u 

4—4 

3 

X 

X 

aa 

8 


o 2 

c 

o 

4—4 

o 

3 


aa 

u 

<U 

c 

>4 


t-l 

o 


c 

tab 

2 x 

x o 

;■ 4-4 

>4 3 

X Xl 

Urn _ 

o .£ 

O 73 

C S 
o £ 

N 3 

o aa 

x *x 

4-> C 

'> 0 
> o 


IU 

X 

4—4 

c 

® c 
aa o 

= x 

■6 £ 

£ « 

OJ C/5 

^ g 

03 O 

”2 ir: 

x 

0 1= 
E § 


SI! 




3 


G 

O 

cd 

T3 

• 

X 

O 

> 

D 


_ 


56 



























57 











m 


So® 

gg£ 

° LO ° 

g-tSin £ ™ 
3 o oo T- £ 


0) 

"0 ro 

.-p co 


o ■= 

CD (/) 

•- p 

Q_ P 

CO 3 

5.2 £ 

O) Q- 0 


0 

'q. 

03 

O 

03 

E 


o 

-4—» 

O 

£ 
-»—> 
CO 

o 

o 


c 

03 

CO 

Q) 

-o 


£ 

O 


03 

L- 

<13 

Q. 

O 

0 


0 

1_ 

0 

3 

0 


o 

o 


3 q= 


«0 c 


o 

CO 

0)0 


0 

Q. m 

o d 

N- O 

o ° 


eo OO 


0 

03 

■o 

_3 

CO 


0 

0 

o 

Cl 

co 

d 


■o 

0 

0 

JQ 

>>.E 

2 co 

E 0 


0 

E 


0 

0 

0 

0 

i_ 

o 

c 


0 

CL 


CD 

•ji .Q CL 0 -0 

0 w o o £ 0 

E •*-* LO O O 

0 co • rS = to 

CL O O °- 0 0 

O O 60 t- O) P 










■S 

xm 


■ ’ 

_ 


o 

c 

0 

0 

O 

i_ 

3 

O 

0 

C 

o 

0 

c 

E 

0 

*—* 

c 

o 

O 


"O CD 
0 O) 
0 b 
— 0 
>» JC 
tr 0 O 
O p 0 

0 *T Q 
o 0 • 

C 0 0 
0 ’o 0 
0 0 
£ CL 3 

® iS| 

t 0 u 
h £ 0 
•o ^ > 

CD 0 O 
> CL E 
2^0 
E zj *- 
2 E o 


0 

JC 

tc 

3 

V»— 

(D 03 
-•—» •*—» 

03 0) 

8 | 

O <D 

0 ,2 
^ 5p 
>, 0 
0 

E ° 

«4-» 

■O c 

0 p 
T3 P 

0 CD 
0 P 


0 

0 

0 

CL-O 

^ c 

0 .0 

is 

81 

_3 0 
0 

0 

0 :b 
"O L - 

•§ ° 

O Q_ 

id 

SZ h- 


c 

0 

<P 

O 


— 0 


0 0 
<: E 
•o 0 

0 3 
» • —* 
0 -O 

0 0 
i— 

h- X 

— CL 
(/) £ 
&g. 

I I 


_0 

0 
-*—> 

0 


Kill 












n 


0 

-Q 

_o 

O 

0 


C 

o 

■g 

0 

> 

c 

o 

o 

0 


0 

0 

> 

o 

> 

c 


0 

_Q 

d P 

0 

0 tJ 

0 £ 
JD 0 

It 

I i 

O ^ 

~ 0 

1/5 P 

0 

0 ~ 

0 .9- 

m ° 
0 0 

0 fc. 

S'* 

0 


0 

0 

T3 

0 

0 

3 


0 

P J= 


C 
0 

0 <P 

0 O 

11 
w 0 
0 P 

I? 

g C 
E .o 

0 0 
o o 

0 «E 
>> b 
f - -c J3 
b cl o 


0 


p 0 

0 o 

E p 0 

d 0 o 

0 0 

0 0 r- 

* fcf 

0 0^ 

££2! 

o 0^ 

i_ i- t 

o 0 0 

?■§•- 

0 0 o 

F 0 3 

•5 '03 O 

0 o $ 
0 -b > 

Js O 0 

0 P 0 

i— X. -*—> 
CL O 0 

0 3 E 


■O 

o 

0 "0 

E £ 

0 TD 

E .E 
Ql 0 

0 -O 

0 0 

0 3 
o 0 

2 E . 

^ O) 0 

C ■ P 03 

9 0 £ 
E 0 0 

-t—> k_ -t—< 
0 ■*“’ 0 
0 b to 

u O > 

-t—< >4— > 




■ -rfe" 


C 

o 

0 
-*—> 

'q. 

'o 

0 




58 













< 1 ) 

CL 


O 

TO CD 

£ to ro 

O O O £ 0 

CN CO O O m 
• • ^ 

t- CO - TO TO 

WWr- O) -t 


co 

oo Q) 
O co 

O ro 

V CD 


$ T - 
o 

5= O 


CD 


o £ 

TO ~ 


CD 

C CO 

c/5 £ 

TO CO 
TO *- 

O $ 


CO 

s 8 

c O 

TO M . 
O CO 
C C 
O O 


-:r ,=■ r\ »- u u 
TO > .E _E CO O '4= 


C 
TO 
to 

C 
TO 

£ TO C 

(OO o 


o 0 
TO eg 0- 

CO ^ 


CO 

£ 


CO co 
TO TO 


CO 


i 

CO 

.J- £ ~0 . 

E cc 

§ TO TO O) - w 

-•—> *-> O - C 3 (— 

^ c C c c ■= a J 
rc^-oroooE^E 

ilOOCO*=-^3ilC 


CO 

CO 

TO 

O 

O 


£ ~ 
Cl O 
~ .TO 


TO 


■ - fe£s V -a, £» 




WV~n 

■ wm. , 


3 

E 


o 

o o 

TO CO 

£ c 

CD TO 
CO C 

£’e 

TO- (0 
TO c 
:C O 

h- o 


TO 2 

_C TO 

— too 
3 TO 
O TO 

C Jt= 
TO 

|f 

-2 <d 
TO C 
^ TO 

CO 


TO — 
O CO 

TO O 

£ E 

O To 

^ 00 
TO ^ 
CL CO 


TO *- 
■*-’ r* 
TO E 

I S 

c| 

O TO 

~ c 
TO O 
TO O 

E _C 

TO .E 5 
TO JC 

k— 

^ jC 

ri 

•I E 

CL TO 
TO £ 

£ To 


TOE — 


to 

c 

TO TO 

# * 
I- O 

_co £ 

Q) TO 
> O 
TO 0 

C £ 
O *_ 
~ O 
2 TO 

C n 

0 CO 

o 0 
c E 
o o 

O CL 


O 

TO tC 

CL O 

E CL 

c 

i.s 


TO 

o 

c 

TO 

E 


TO 

l_ 

3 

■ 4 —< 

TO 

l_ 

TO 
CL 

E £ 
£ to 

CD °- 
C 0 
CO 

TO TO 

II 

O CL 


C 

TO 

O 

C 

O TO 

-OS 

TO £ 

o o 

CO 

TO 0 

o- -S 

to TO 
O > 
TO g 

8 g 

tl 

"O x 

TO ® 
C TO 
TO D3 


CO 

TO 

3 

O 

TO 

O 

E 

TO 0 
TO 0 

S€ 

-D W 

? ‘O 

i g 

I £ 

O TO 


—' 


’ ,i 




_C0 

TO 

> 

TO 

£ 

O 


CO 

£ co o 
-2 0 0 
o O > 
E > c n 


fm 

S'# 






'aii 


~i*- V 


a 

o 


6 

■M 


TO 

TO 

TO TO 
JC 

D) Q 

o 

E 05 

£ to to 

E TO 
TO .E > 
TO TO o 
O- To co 

E o £ 

3 0-0 

O- _C0 _c 
CO 0 o 
i_ CO r 

TO ft 

■4—* CD 
TO > 

^ H— 

-O o 
c if) 


£ 

o 


O To 



^ £ n 

-E TO TO 

O CO O 


TO 
£ 
o ° 
**- E 

TO o 

■fz <*- 
O 0 
TO 0 
it CD 

LU J= 
CD 

-9 -c 

ii 

TO ^ 
TO i- 

CO -2 

TO | 
TO > 
TO CD 

If 

C = 

° s 

O CL 


o 

’3 

cr 

-- TO 
TO D1 

«S 

2 q 

CO TO 
TO O 

f| 

O Cl 

£ E 


o 


TO ^ 

r ^ 

TO O 


O £ 


£ TO TO = 


E CD 
TO TO 


TO 

> 

O 

E 

TO 

1 — 

-»L 

C 

TO 

C 

E 

TO 

-*—< 

c 

o 

o 

sz 

CD • 
CO 
TO 
O 

c 
TO 
O 
CO It 

E TO 


TO 

TO 


TO 


C 

o 

cl. 

25^0 

3 TO "t- CO 
O' x: TO TO 
_J 0. o < 


59 














60 











61 












o 

in 

c/> 

o 

«4-» 

O 


o 

x 

3 

o 

L_ 

CD 

CL 


0 O 

C D) ^ 

0 O C 
; ®tj w 
u. o 8- c 0 

0 n 0 0 X 

%*= <D Q-~ 
^ o .t o C 


o o 


0 0 
~ 3 


CD 


0 

C 

0 


0 0 T3 O O 


C 

3 

o 

E 

0 

"O 

c 

0 


0 


0 ±3 

.E *o 
E c 


8 I®* 

6 §*?” 

- -S •— O 
C -O Ot!” 

o >* 0 0 -E 

_ CD 0 £ 


0 

4-> 

c 

o 

o 


o o -x x 


0 


E co 

if 


0 


0 E 

>T o -o 

0 o 5 2 0 S fii XJ .-5 

>o.-o®g--o»g-E© 


5 £ 0?5 

? -o 0 ^ 

C 0 0 Iq 0 


O 
O -Q 


” 1 1 £ § o £ £ 


0 

0 

CD 


if 


■,W. 7 




-. tMl-im 


c 

0 

° o 

~ xi 
O 0 

E m 
l' 0 

0 0 
> x 

i_ ,,_ x 

O vP 

^ o" 
X o 
cd m 
i“ A 


■D 
0 

g| 

X O 

'3 0 

CJ 0 
0 CD -O 
»- »- 0 
- 0 b 

|L_ I • — 

3 
O’ 

0 
k— 

0 
k_ 

0 


0 

o 


0 

E 


c_ 

>— • — 

o 
0 

L_ 

£ 
0 


0 

0 


xi 

0 

0 

E 

0 

CL 


C 

0 

E 

0 

0 

i_ 
-t—< 

0 


& § 


o 

?» 

i_ 0 

- El 0 
0 .E 5 -^ 
cl x .E 


X) 

0 

0 

E 


= 0 
> 0 

c j= 

o 5 

-4 —» ^ 

0 >> 

2 Z 

x .©> 
0 x 


0 
x 

o 

«4—* 

E 

i_ 

0 
x 

'5 0 

cr x 

0 Q_ 

E 0 
0 0 

■II 

0 — 

E 0 
0 B 


0 -Q 

0 c 

o> 0 

tfc 0 
O P 

4-1 3 
c cr 
0 — 

|1 

2 s 

•5 0 

c 2 
0 *- 

«- c 
O 0 

O E 


Z: 0 

>. S o 
ra « n 

b CL "O 

r- 0 0 

t ” -M 

O XI CO 
X t_ != 

1 - O O 

s- 8 


0 


c 

"O 0 

2 E 

£ 0 c 
> Q) .E 

O -5= <D 

0 0 > 


= ^ E5 u 


X 0 

3 0 
Q- -b 


0 


0 


CL 5 St: 
0 l! 0 










m 


0 

o 

o 

> 


gAt® 


m 


I'M 

m 


0 

> 

o 

o E 

r 2 

o x 

0 c 

0 0 

£ Hi 

O O 

4-> »4— 

•O .— 
0 0 

Z.x 

Q. 0 

o 

.*2 -b 

E o 

3 o 

3 (D 
0 O 
0 3 
> "O 

< .E 


XJ 

0 
4—> 

0 


0 

0 

C 

3 

0 

X 

E 

o 

>4— 

0 
-*—> 

c 

0 

c 

E 

0 

c 

o 

o 


m ° 

0 4-> 

D) -Q 

0 0 

1 — 0 

»i a> 
® >.£ 
- <S >. 
o E 2 

— 4—« 
0 


0 o 

S 2-0 

0 tl L. 
0 O) 0 

“ E > 

> o 


0 xj, 


$ 

o 


0 c 

§s 

§- 

c 2 

'X CD 
C 0 
O "O 
0 O 
0 x 

0 0 


o 


0 0 o 
> 0 p 


c C 

?■; 
•E -2 

5 2 

*3 b 

o 2 

O CL 


0 


0 

X 

c 

3 

O 

CL 

E 


o 

'c 

0 

CD 

b 0 

o C 

>, W 

•4—» 0 

L. 

•43 Q. 

■E © 
Ox 

i CO 
O E 




0 5 

CL O 

0 o 

> 0 
_ L. 
■ -4-» 

O X 

CO LU 


62 

















CD 

c 


_co 


X3 

CD £ 

o 

'■*—> 


c 

03 


CD 

l_ 

-j= .co 

CD 

u. 


o 


CD 

o o ^ 

OjS w 
m cm o 

™ CD O 

CD 

CL 


*t= 

E 

-> 

O 

O 

CD 

CD 

V4— 

3 

o 

CO 

o 

CO 

L— 
C4— 


CD 

-Ss 

3 3 

C cm cm 


c 

03 

O 

Q) -t—> 

i- c 

03 (0 
CO "q 

CO 1= 
^C/D 

3 $ 

03 2 
<D -£3 

E o 

i_ ■*-“ 

cd ~ 

CL =3 

i O 

o i 

_J T3 


CO 

C 

o 

O 

Q) 03 
Q CD 
3 o: 
~o 


c 

03 

O 

O 

CO 


<D ~E -*—» 

i m 

co c 

1 E 
fi 

D) O 

.E o 


__ co 

c 2 

03 O 
_ Ql 

co 5 
o 1/5 

Cl) 

2 m 
CD O 
_c (D 
-D !t= 
03 CD 


-C- Q) 
CO o 
.2 3 
-D 

^ 0) 


0 CD 

£ 3 

CD Q_ 
C CD 

3 o 

CO CD 
5 -C 

*♦- "O 

o c 
_ o 

03 ^ 
cm CD 
C -Q 
CD ^ 

■*-> r~ 
£§ 
m E 

Sf 

g o 
c o 


CD 

O ° 
° CD 

C t 
O 3 

II 

~o co 

2 CD 

c £ 

CD 2 
£ CO 

•4 —• 

TD C 
C 03 
CD "q 

C t 
O 3 
N CO 


CD 

C 

3 

— CO 

o 2 

C/D Ll 














64 
















65 











>:} m ■■?■■* 


C/5 

C 


_ o 


CO 


fO 

C 2d 
O O g o 

.1- O - *-* 

o o oo 


I 

c 


V: 


CO Tn U U CD 

la S ® S°i• = 

s-» ® -o' c ia °-s--g -5 


CL 

3 ° 

O O 


2 0 ON O "c c 
CL 2 CO CD E 



0 





c 


0 

•*—> 

0 


0 

0 

*- 


0 


0 

E 

0 

0 

'q. 


0 


0 

0 

X 

0 

1 _ 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

c 

0 

0 

VL/ 

O 

C 

0 

0 

0 

0 

in 

0 

E 

- 4 —» 

c 

0 

SI 

-t—' 

0 

O 

O 

0 

0 

G 

0 

0 

E 


o 

e 

• 4 —» 

c 

o 

o 

CO 

Cl) 

i— 

‘o 

CT 

CD 

k— 

E 

0 

•*-> 

CO 

>k 

CO 

0 


c 

x: 

I 

0 

0 

> 

0 

X 

0 

C 

0 




0 

0 


0 

£ 

C 

0 

E 

0 

0 


0 

> 


-o 

c 

0 


o 

3 = 

0 


0 0 
jz 0 

r e 

o 2 . 

si a. 

^ © 


0 
0 
0 

~ C 
0 0 
•“ > 

O Vj > o 
C 0 

OO 05 
0 *“ 
£ 


>>: 

0 . 

E °- 

>, >^ 0) 


0 


0 


X 

Cl 


0 

0 

0 

CL 

0 


0 

0 

o 

O 

•0 

0 


±= 0 
S' s 

Q ll 


c 

0 

o 


0 

£ 

0 


E 

0 

0 

0 

* £ 
c 

> 0 

11 

_ oo 

0 £ 

O -b 

O V4- 

c 2 
.2 0 

m O 

= o 

-2 x: 

— c ™ ■— 0 


0 

> 

0 O 

n 0 
~ 0 


0 

0 


E 


0^0 
*0 E 

o 0 0 

o> E 


0 


co 

0 


0 

E 

D 

CL 


O 

O i; 

DO <D 
^ O > 
C 3 _: 

9 "5 0 


c 
0 

E 
0 
o 
0 

CL 
0 

cd"S 

•I E 

3 £ 
0 > 

£ o 
. 0 

£ £ 
o 0> 

0 r- 
CL i= 
0 *4- 

o o 


0 

c 

0 


m 


o 
0 
O3 

o 


0 

c 

o 


0 


0 

o _ 


O 

0 

i_ 

0 "O 

.2 jT 

N 

X *- 
O c /5 

c E 

.2 -g 

i = 

^ a 

0 E 
F ° 

I— o 


Ef 


> t. ~ 

> m ^ 


0 

0 

> 

>s~ 

0 § 
0 ^ 
_o 00 

o Tjj 

~o 7 d 

0 ^ 

0 "S 

"o ® 
2 

§i 

o E 


00 -0 
c c 
o 0 
~ X 
3 ^ 

o 0 

0 lt= 

**- 3 

8 S 


0 

i_ 

13 

0 

£ co 

£ o 
0 ~ 

N 3 
= 0 
^2 o 

X 0 

° S. 
° 

0 0 


0 

0 


0 

0 


0 

0 — 

'o..2 -2 0 
•q 0 o 
0 E ^ o 

0 E 0- 
0 uC 0 0 


■g 0 
£ O 
0 O 
^ > 




0 

0 

= 0 
0 

0 o 
.2 £ 
0 0 
= CL 
0 £ 

c == 
o 0 
•■p -C 

t 5 

0 0 
0 0 
*- o 
0 b 

SI 0 
0 - 
0 0 
c c 

E 3 

0 £ 
Q- b) 
< .2 


0 

_c 

• 4 —» 

03 

C 

> 

o 

0 

0‘ 

E 

J 3 

CL 

C 

0 

c 

E 

0 

■*-> 

c 

o 

o 


0 

E 

_o 

CL 

0 

JO 

- 4 —* 

O 

c 

o 

'0 

o 

Ql 

k_ 

0 
- 4 —» 

0 

<; 


0 


03 

O 

2 

si 

- 4 —» 

0 

> 

O 

E 

x 

0 

> 

'0 

0 

0 

0 


0 

0 

£ 


0 

03 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 

$ 

O 


e <; 

0 
£ 


o JC 

c g 
0 0 

E 03 
0 c 

o ^ 

1- 2 

3 0 

® E 
£ a) 

03 >» 
2 

!-0 0 

.-2 c 

jC 0 

2 - i 

CL E 
0 iS 
r c 
o 
o 


J= 


<s> _ 

"O OO 
C L- 
0 O 

gig 

£ o 
0 0 

® » 

O .b 
- 0 
C JO 

.1 r 

0 *2 

0 "O 
0 0 

c ° 
0 ® 
0 0 
0 0 


0 

c 

0 

co" = 

0 03 
X3 O 

2-0 

.2 ^ 

E 0 

i— 

0’ 00 
c 00 

*— - 4 —» 

o C 
■O (0 

b .2 

0 E 

^ 0 
— - 4 —» 

0 C 

|3 

c e 

(D 0 

£ 
O) O 


0 

£ 

> 

0 

0 

0 

U 

0 

l_ 

0 

0 = 
TD g 
X > 
0 c 
0 0 
0 E 

E 0 
o v 
o J= 


0 | 

•2 s« 

w 0 = 

£ 0 0 

(O L *s 

Q- I- > 


0 

O 

o 

> 


0 

0 o 
0 0 ’SZ 
0-^0 
N >s 0 


0 0 


■0 
X 

o 

*-0 0 
0 «> N 

£•0 0 


0 

0 

0 


§ X 

g 0 

03 


O 03 c 

.2 2 

0 0 

k+— 

o 


O 

L. 

0 

c 


o c 

■^3 0 

o o c 
3 S O 
•b 0 !i=: 

0 c "O 
0 ) 0-0 
Q o 0 


c 

0 

o 

"OO 

•- .2 

11 
c x 
0 o . 

£-0-0 

E 1 -B 
0-0-0 

c © 2 
o £ 
o 

o — 

m ^ = 

03 O 0 
i_ > *-« 

O *= C 
^O0 

^ 0 75 

2 0 2 
0 o 0 


0 

.Q 


0 

O 


C 

o 


E 

0 


0 

■g 

x 

O O 


66 














67 












O I- — CD 

CO 0 2 o 3= 

w a c w 03 


0 


vr 




c 


O 

L_ 

0 


x: 


0 


C r- 

0 


-*—> 

Q. 

0 


c 

E 

1 

>*— 03 

•2 TO ^ £ 

^ oj2 0 
Box — 

$ 

TO 

03 

c 

TO 

0 

0 

O 3 

C 

'cl 

TO 

.C 

4 —> 

4 —> 

c 

TO 0 

r- »- O — 

E TO E TO TO 
r > 0 T C 

3 

O 

E 

C 

< 4 — 

0 

0 .2 

id 

3 

0 

O 

0 

3 XO 

hr q .0 ra 

03 

CL 


0 


o -t 
c 0 

>, E 

03 — 

E o 

03 js 

o ■£ 

03 *+— 

I § 

O ro 


TO 

0 

0 

03 

X3 

.1 


0 — 


gi o 

t jQ ^ 


> 

<S c 
E o 


0 

X) 


0 

«i 


-4—* 

c C 

0 O 

1? 

0 2 

0 b 

m CD 

S.E 

0 >< 

Q. E 


o 

0 

0 

-C 


o c 

B E 

>- +-* 

C 2 

-C F ~ 

CD L 0 

g B 0 

2 c *=: 
jz o 
*- o 


TO 

C 

0 

^ 05 
52 o £ 

0 73 o 
>*«= 
0 <D 


0 F +-- 


$ 

to 

c 

3 

O 


C/3 


0 

C 

o 

JO 

O 

0 


0 

0 

0 

0 


0 

0 

0 

O 

0 

C 


0 
3 

03 "q 3 0 
03 £ -g 


sl 

l-s 

5 -o 
O c 

«= E 
0 £ 


£ c 


0 


.E 0 


^ O "c 

0‘o g 
■TO .TO 0 

3 — Q. 


c 

0 

v_ 

0 

0 

i_ 

CL 


c 

3 

C 

o 

c 


0 

0 


3 
0 
0 0 


o 

c 

2 

3 

O 

x: 

C/) 

0 

■g 

‘3 

5 = 

to 

0 

o 

0 

c' 


to"? 

z'-g -c 

O) w .? 
E 0 X 

^ g & 

0 03 c 

O C 03 

»_ 0 E 

O 03 c 

"■Op 
■D 0.b 
0 is > 

0 0C 
3 .C 0 


E 0 O 

.2 c 

0^0 

0 03 u 
0 *- 
£ O g 

0^2 

8l fe 

.2 -c o 

2 Z ^ 

■£ o 

o -p .E 

c 0 


o 

X 

o 

-4—* 

0 

X3 


£ 

O 


is 0 

>> E 

0 .2 
-x c 
— 0 
0 p 


0 

0 

0 

0 


o 

2 

o 

1 


T3 

0 

-♦-» 

0 

c 

*L_ 

_o 

16 
0 d 
0 o 

Q 3 *s 

3 .2 

-3 TO 
0 0 

0 E 

Q. 0 

E fe 
5 S 


0 

O 

o 

> 


o 


o 

>> 


0 

E 5 0 
o — 

TO 0 O 

0 TO W 
O 0 C 
O J- — 
TO TO) TO 
O 03 C 
-t 3 
C 0 O 

E ‘ 

0 

c c 
0 ^5 

03 .E 

o E 


0 

> 


TO — •— 

r- "IZ -4—» TZ 


O 

0 
3 
O 
c 

TO O 

03 2 

Z .2 
£ E 


0 


0 

c 

o 

o 


TO 03 
> 0 
c ^ 

i g 

o E 

hi 0 

03 i_ 


o O 
TO £ 
it: s 
0 0 

^ £ 
TO a3 
o > 
0 0 
Q. T 
0 £ 
LU O 

0 03 

0 -E 


0 •= 


c 10 

3 g 

o E 

^ TO 

03 «- 


c 

o 

4 —« 

o 

c 

3 

■ —X 

c 

o 

o 

c 

c 3 
.2 o 
0 E 
E 2 
E 0 

TO 2 

C 3 
O O 
O 0 


6 

in 


c 

o 

0 

TO 

0 

L_ 

03 

0 

TO 


68 


solvents may not degrade fully 

under certain subsurface 

conditions. 


















BH 

SJ5MH 


3L 


>>.£ 

® to 

C o 

~ o 

03 


CO 

c 

o _ 

00 "to 

.9 E 


“ > CL 



0 ) £ 

cd o 


CO 


Q. C 
03 O 


. c 

03 O 

'+- .E ^ co 
° E o "o v 
2 jS P g 

g g & N S 

03 0-^*0 CO .b 


c 

CT3 CO 

O C 03 


03 

0 


C TO 

0) c - r- 

E m c t C 

0 03 0 
O 0 
C £ 0 
i— C O i— 

0 0 O Q. 


0 

0 


O 

0 I 
g I 


BiWfe 




,r ( *ja 


pa 


fin 


I* 

*■ •••- ■' 


if) 

• 4 —» 

E 


0 
L. 

3 

- 4 —» 

•- * 
5 O 2 

0 W E 


7 Q) 

^ O 0 
C C 0 
O 0 £= 
*4= 0 *_ 

m E ° 
0 l — 

CD CL CO 


0 

E 


S e 

So 


0 '-p 

Q. C O 
_ O 0 

o £ £ 

w 0 0 
£ CL.t; 
o ^ 

—I TO 


0 


CL 

E 
E 0 


0 

0 

X 

>* 


0 

_c 


0 

o 

> 

X 


■*-> 

o 

> 

0 


51 = 

0 c 3 

0 

O 3 

*L 

0 -q 

0 

o o 

O 

c t. 

O 

Z3 CL 


0 w 

X O 

0 . o 

I- > 


0 


0 c 
03 0 
0 
0 
DU 
0 
"c 

O 


c 

0 

LL 

C 

o 


0 

0 
- 4 —» 

0 

0 

E 

- 4 —» 

(/) 


0 
TO c 

0 t 
0 0 
0 SZ 

CO O 


E 

0 

0 

O 

l— 
■ 4 —> 
0 
CL 

Vt— 

O 

c 

o 

0 

TO 

E 

O) 

0 

TO 

O 

X 


E .2 O 


0 
- 4 —» 

i 

-O 

c 03 

3 C 

o -x 

hi 0 
03 cp 

-O 0 
0 2 
O <5 

® 03 

•- ^ 
0 o 

5 ? 

jgl 

0 


TO 

C 0 
0 0 
TO c _c 

J? O o 

Q-£ 0 
a3 - 
0 Ql® 
^ 0 c 

g ^ 03 
05 

03 y 0 


> 0 

X = 

O g 

0 


C ~ 


0 

0 

L_ 

0 

> 


0 


2 ^ 
■o °- 
>% > 
X X) 


E 8 o 

co ° 0 

C 0 **r 

0 £ ° 
03 c 

o -g,.2 

O 3 0 

.9 2 t 

E £ '~o 


0 

c 

S £ 

03 03 

03 _ 
0 ^ 

0 O 
> 0 
f= it 
2 0 

< 0 
0 X 
TO 

11 

Cl ”0 

c ® 


0 


0 
03. 

O C 

k_ — 

■O 0 

>N i— 

X 0 


_0 

0 

£ 

C 

o 

4—< 

o 

0 

"c 

•*-> 

c 

0 

c 

0 

E 

i— 

0 

CL 

E 

0 

0 

03 

c 

0 

10 


0 

c| § 
Si. ra Q. 
^ ® E 
X 0 o 
0(^0 


. c 

3; ° 

(03 Q 
03 C 

^ D 


CM CO 


0 

TO 

C 

0 


o 

CL 

E 

o 

c ° 
2 

03 CD 


0 

TO 

C 

0 

O 

CL 

E 


03 03 O 
O 


0 

i— 

O 

0 

TO 

C 

0 

o 


o 

0 


c 

_ 0 
0 03 


o 

> 


o 

0 


03 

i_ 

0 

TO 

C 

13 

II 


if) 

D 


E 

0 

0 


0 

O 

o 

> 

if) 


0 

o 

> 


0 

o 

o 

> 


69 


PAHs = polyaromatic hydrocarbons 
PCBs = polychlorinated biphenyls 
TPH = total petroleum hydrocarbons 




































Appendix E 

Works Cited and Other Useful Resources 


A "PB" publication number in parentheses indicates 
that the document is available from the National 
Technical Information Service (NTIS), 5285 Port 
Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161, (703^87-4650). 

Site Assessment 

ASTM. 1997. Standard Practice for Environmental 
Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site 
Assessment Process. American Society for Testing 
Materials (ASTM El 527-97). 

ASTM. 1996. Standard Practice for Environmental 
Site Assessments: Transaction Screen Process. 
American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM 
E1528-96). 

ASTM. 1995. Guide for Developing Conceptual Site 
Models for Contaminated Sites. American Society for 
Testing and Materials (ASTM El689-95). 

ASTM. 1995. Provisional Standard Guide for 
Accelerated Site Characterization for Confirmed or 
Suspected Petroleum Releases. American Society for 
Testing and Materials (ASTM PS3-95). 

Go-Environmental Solutions. N.D. http://www. 
gesolut ions .com/assess .htm. 

Geoprobe Systems, Inc. 1998. Rental Rate Sheet. 
September 15. 

Robbat, Albert, Jr. 1997. Dynamic Workplans and 
Field Analytics: The Keys to Cost Effective Site 
Characterization and Cleanup. Tufts University under 
Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency. October. 

U.S. EPA. 1997. Expedited Site Assessment Tools for 
Underground Storage Tank Sites: A Guide for 
Regulators and Consultants (EPA 510-B-97-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1997. Field Analytical and Site 
Characterization Technologies, Summary of 
Applications (EPA-542-R-97-011). 

U.S. EPA. 1997. Road Map to Understanding 
Innovative Technology Options for Brownfields 
Investigation and Cleanup. OSWER. (PB97-144810). 

U.S. EPA. 1997. The Tool Kit of Technology 
Information Resources for Brownfields Sites. 
OSWER. (PB97-144828). 


U.S. EPA. 1996. Consortium for Site Characterization 
Technology: Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-012). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Field Portable X-Ray Fluorescence 
(FPXRF), Technology Verification Program: Fact 
Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-009a). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Portable Gas Chromatograph/Mass 
Spectrometers (GC/MS), Technology Verification 
Program: Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-009c). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Site Characterization Analysis 
Penetrometer System (SCAPS) LIF Sensor (EPA 
540-MR-95-520, EPA 540 R-95-520). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Site Characterization and 
Monitoring: A Bibliography of EPA Information 
Resources (EPA 542-B-96-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Soil Screening Guidance 
(540/R-96/128). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Clor-N-Soil PCB Test Kit L2000 
PCB/Chloride Analyzer (EPA 540-MR-95-518, EPA 
540-R-95-518). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Contract Laboratory Program: 
Volatile Organics Analysis of Ambient Air in 
Canisters Revision VCAA01.0 (PB95-963524). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Contract Lab Program: Draft 
Statement of Work for Quick Turnaround Analysis 
(PB95-963523). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. EnviroGard PCB Test Kit (EPA 
540-MR-95-517, EPA 540-R-95-517). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Field Analytical Screening Program: 
PCB Method (EPA 540-MR-95-521, EPA 
540-R-95-521). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. PCB Method, Field Analytical 
Screening Program (Innovative Technology 
Evaluation Report) (EPA 540-R-95-521, 
PB96-130026); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-95-521). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Profile of the Iron and Steel Industry 
(EPA 310-R-95-005). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Rapid Optical Screen Tool (ROST™) 
(EPA 540-MR-95-519, EPA 540-R-95-519). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Risk Assessment Guidance for 
Superfund, http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/ 


71 


Catalog/EPA540R95132.html. 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Assessment and Remediation of 
Contaminated Sediments (ARCS) Program (EPA 
905-R-94-003). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Characterization of 
Chromium-Contaminated Soils Using Field-Portable 
X-ray Fluorescence (PB94-210457). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Development of a Battery-Operated 
Portable Synchronous Luminescence 
Spectrofluorometer (PB94-170032). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Engineering Forum Issue: 
Considerations in Deciding to Treat Contaminated 
Unsaturated Soils In Situ (EPA 540-S-94-500, 

PB94-177771). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. SITE Program: An Engineering 
Analysis of the Demonstration Program (EPA 
540-R-94-530). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Data Quality Objectives Process for 
Superfund (EPA 540-R-93-071). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Conference on the Risk Assessment 
Paradigm After 10 Years: Policy and Practice, Then, 
Now, and in the Future. 

http://www.epa.gov/ncepihom/Catalog/EPA600R9303 

9.html. 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Guidance for Evaluating the 
Technical Impracticability of Ground Water 
Restoration. OSWER directive (9234.2-25). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Guide for Conducting Treatability 
Studies Under CERCLA: Biodegradation Remedy 
Selection (EPA 540-R-93-519a, PB94-117470). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Subsurface Characterization and 
Monitoring Techniques (EPA 625-R-93-003a&b). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Characterizing Heterogeneous 
Wastes: Methods and Recommendations (March 
26-28,1991) (PB92-216894). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Conducting Treatability Studies 
Under RCRA (OSWER Directive 9380.3-09FS, 
PB92-963501) 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guidance for Data Useability in Risk 
Assessment (Part A) (9285.7-09A). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability 
Studies Under CERCLA: Final (EPA 540-R-92-071A, 
PB93-126787). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability 


Studies Under CERCLA: Soil Vapor Extraction (EPA 
540-2-91-019a&b, PB92-227271 & PB92-224401). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability 
Studies Under CERCLA: Soil Washing (EPA 
540-2-9l-020a&b, PB92-170570 & PB92-170588). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide for Conducting Treatability 
Studies Under CERCLA: Solvent Extraction (EPA 
540-R-92-016a, PB92-239581). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Guide to Site and Soil Description 
for Hazardous Waste Site Characterization, Volume 1: 
Metals (PB92-146158). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. International Symposium on Field 
Screening Methods for Hazardous Wastes and Toxic 
Chemicals (2nd), Proceedings. Held in Las Vegas, 
Nevada on February 12-14, 1991 (PB92-125764). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Sampling of Contaminated Sites 
(PB92-110436). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Ground Water Issue: Characterizing 
Soils for Hazardous Waste Site Assessment 
(PB-91-921294). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Guide for Conducting Treatability 
Studies Under CERCLA: Aerobic Biodegradation 
Remedy Screening (EPA 540-2-9l-013a&b, 
PB92-109065 & PB92-109073). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Interim Guidance for Dermal 
Exposure Assessment (EPA 600-8-91-011A). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. A New Approach and Methodologies 
for Characterizing the Hydrogeologic Properties of 
Aquifers (EPA 600-2-90-002). 

U.S. EPA. 1986. Superfund Public Health Evaluation 
Manual (EPA 540-1-86-060). 

U.S. EPA. N.D. Status Report on Field Analytical 
Technologies Utilization: Fact Sheet (no publication 
number available). 

U.S.G.S. 

http://www.mapping.usgs.gov/esic/to_order.hmtl. 

Vendor Field Analytical and Characterization 
Technologies System (Vendor FACTS), Version 1.0 
(Vendor FACTS can be downloaded from the Internet 
at www.prcemi.com/visitt or from the CLU-IN Web 
site at http://clu-in.com). 

The Whitman Companies. Last modified October 4, 
1996. Environmental Due Diligence. 
http://www.whitmanco. com/dilgnce 1 .html. 


72 


Site Cleanup 

ASTM. N.D. New Standard Guide for Remediation by 
Natural Attenuation at Petroleum Release Sites 
(ASTM E50.01). 

Federal Register. September 9, 1997. www.access. 
gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/acesl40.html, vol.62, no.174, p. 
47495-47506. 

Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable. 
http://www.frtr.gov/matrbt/top_page.html. 

Interagency Cost Workgroup. 1994. Flistorical Cost 
Analysis System. Version 2.0. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory. 1996. A 
Compendium of Cost Data for Environmental 
Remediation Technologies (LA-UR-96-2205). 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory. N.D. Treatability of 
Hazardous Chemicals in Soils: Volatile and 
Semi-Volatile Organics (ORNL-6451). 

Robbat, Albert, Jr. 1997. Dynamic Workplans and 
Field Analytics: The Keys to Cost Effective Site 
Characterization and Cleanup. Tufts University under 
Cooperative Agreement with the U.S. Environmental 
Protection Agency. October. 

U.S. EPA. 1997. Road Map to Understanding 
Innovative Technology Options for Brownfields 
Investigation and Cleanup. OSWER. PB97-144810). 

U.S. EPA. 1997. The Tool Kit of Technology 
Information Resources for Brownfields Sites. 
OSWER. (PB97-144828). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Bioremediation Field Evaluation: 
Champion International Superfund Site, Libby, 
Montana (EPA 540-R-96-500). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Bibliography for Innovative Site 
Clean-Up Technologies (EPA 542-B-96-003). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Bioremediation of Hazardous 
Wastes: Research, Development, and Field 
Evaluations (EPA 540-R-95-532, PB96-130729). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Citizen's Guides to Understanding 
Innovative Treatment Technologies (EPA 
542-F-96-013): 

Bioremediation (EPA 542-F-96-007, EPA 
542-F-96-023) In addition to screening levels, EPA 
regional offices and some states have developed 
cleanup levels, known as corrective action levels; if 
contaminant concentrations are above corrective 


action levels, cleanup must be pursued. The section on 
"Performing a Phase II Site Assessment" in this 
document provides more information on screening 
levels, and the section on "Site Cleanup" provides 
more information on corrective action levels. 

Chemical Dehalogenation (EPA 542-F-96-004, EPA 
542-F-96-020) 

In Situ Soil Flushing (EPA 542-F-96-006, EPA 
542-F-96-022) 

Innovative Treatment Technologies for Contaminated 
Soils, Sludges, Sediments, and Debris (EPA 

542-F-96-001, EPA 542-F-96-017) 

Phytoremediation (EPA 542-F-96-014, EPA 
542-F-96-025) 

Soil Vapor Extraction and Air Sparging (EPA 
542-F-96-008, EPA 542-F-96-024) 

Soil Washing (EPA 542-F-96-002, EPA 
542-F-96-018) 

Solvent Extraction (EPA 542-F-96-003, EPA 
542-F-96-019) 

Thermal Desorption (EPA 542-F-96-005, EPA 
542-F-96-021) 

Treatment Walls (EPA 542-F-96-016, EPA 
542-F-96-027) 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Cleaning Up the Nation's Waste 
Sites: Markets and Technology Trends (1996 Edition) 
(EPA 542-R-96-005, PB96-178041). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Completed North American 
Innovative Technology Demonstration Projects (EPA 
542-B-96-002, PB96-153127). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Cone Penetrometer/Laser Induced 
Fluorescence (LIF) Technology Verification Program: 
Fact Sheet (EPA 542-F-96-009b). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. EPA Directive: Initiatives to Promote 
Innovative Technologies in Waste Management 
Programs (EPA 540-F-96-012). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Errata to Guide to EPA materials on 
Underground Storage Tanks (EPA 510-F-96-002). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. How to Effectively Recover Free 
Product at Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites: 
A Guide for State Regulators (EPA 510-F-96-001; 
Fact Sheet: EPA 510-F-96-005). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Innovative Treatment Technologies: 


73 


Annual Status Report Database (ITT Database). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Introducing TANK Racer (EPA 
510-F96-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Market Opportunities for Innovative 
Site Cleanup Technologies: Southeastern States (EPA 
542-R-96-007, PB96-199518). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Recent Developments for In situ 
Treatment of Metal-Contaminated Soils (EPA 
542-R-96-008, PB96-153135). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. Review of Intrinsic Bioremediation 
of TCE in Groundwater at Picatinny Arsenal, New 
Jersey and St. Joseph, Michigan (EPA 600-A-95-096, 
PB95-252995). 

U.S. EPA. 1996. State Policies Concerning the Use of 
Injectants for In Situ Groundwater Remediation (EPA 
542-R-96-001, PB96-164538). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Abstracts of Remediation Case 
Studies (EPA 542-R-95-001, PB95-201711). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Accessing Federal Data Bases for 
Contaminated Site Clean-Up Technologies, Fourth 
Edition (EPA 542-B-95-005, PB96-141601). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Field Evaluation: 
Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska (EPA 540-R-95-533). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Field Initiative Site 
Profiles: 

Champion Site, Libby, MT (EPA 540-F-95-506a) 

Eielson Air Force Base, AK (EPA 540-F-95-506b) 

Hill Air Force Base Superfund Site, UT (EPA 
540-F-95-506c) 

Public Service Company of Colorado (EPA 
540-F-95-506d) 

Escambia Wood Preserving Site, FL (EPA 
540-F-95-506g) 

Reilly Tar and Chemical Corporation , MN (EPA 
540-F-95-506h) 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation Final Performance 
Evaluation of the Prepared Bed Land Treatment 
System, Champion International Superfund Site, 
Libby, Montana: Volume I, Text (EPA 
600-R-95-156a); Volume n, Figures and Tables (EPA 
600-R-95-156b). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Bioremediation of Petroleum 
Hydrocarbons: A Flexible, Variable Speed 


Technology (EPA 600-A-95-140, PB96-139035). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Combined Chemical and Biological 
Oxidation of Slurry Phase Polycyclic Aromatic 
Hydrocarbons (EPA 600-A-95-065, PB95-217642). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Contaminants and Remedial Options 
at Selected Metal Contaminated Sites (EPA 
540-R-95-512, PB95-271961). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Development of a Photothermal 
Detoxification Unit: Emerging Technology Summary 
(EPA 540-SR-95-526); Emerging Technology Bulletin 
(EPA 540-F-95-505). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Electrokinetic Soil Processing: 
Emerging Technology Bulletin (EPA 540-F-95-504); 
ET Project Summary (EPA 540-SR-93-515). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Emerging Abiotic In Situ 
Remediation Technologies for Groundwater and Soil: 
Summary Report (EPA 542-S-95-001, PB95-239299). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Emerging Technology Program (EPA 
540-F-95-502). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. ETI: Environmental Technology 
Initiative (document order form) (EPA 542-F-95-007). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Federal Publications on Alternative 
and Innovative Treatment Technologies for Corrective 
Action and Site Remediation, Fifth Edition (EPA 
542-B-95-004, PB96-145099). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Federal Remediation Technologies 
Roundtable: 5 Years of Cooperation (EPA 
542-F-95-007). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Guide to Documenting Cost and 
Performance for Remediation Projects (EPA 
542-B-95-002, PB95-182960). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. In Situ Metal-Enhanced Abiotic 
Degradation Process Technology, Environmental 
Technologies, Inc.: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-95-510). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. In Situ Vitrification Treatment: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-504, 
PB95-125499). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Intrinsic Bioattenuation for 
Subsurface Restoration (book chapter) (EPA 
600-A-95-112, PB95-274213). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. J.R. Simplot Ex-Situ Bioremediation 
Technology for Treatment of TNT-Contaminated 
Soils: Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 


74 


540-R-95-529); Site Technology Capsule (EPA 
540-R-95-529a). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Lessons Learned About In Situ Air 
Sparging at the Denison Avenue Site, Cleveland, Ohio 
(Project Report), Assessing UST Corrective Action 
Technologies (EPA 600-R-95-040, PB95-188082). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Microbial Activity in Subsurface 
Samples Before and During Nitrate-Enhanced 
Bioremediation (EPA 600-A-95-109, PB95-274239). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Musts for USTS: A Summary of the 
Regulations for Underground Tank Systems (EPA 
510-K-95-002). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Natural Attenuation of 
Trichloroethene at the St. Joseph, Michigan, 
Superfund Site (EPA 600-SV-95-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. New York State Multi-Vendor 
Bioremediation: Ex-Situ Biovault, ENSR Consulting 
and Engineering/Larson Engineers: Demonstration 
Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-95-525). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Process for the Treatment of Volatile 
Organic Carbon and Heavy-Metal-Contaminated Soil, 
International Technology Corp.: Emerging 
Technology Bulletin (EPA 540-F-95-509). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Progress in Reducing Impediments to 
the Use of Innovative Remediation Technology (EPA 
542-F-95-008, PB95-262556). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remedial Design/Remedial Action 
Handbook (PB95-963307-ND2). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remedial Design/Remedial Action 
Handbook Fact Sheet (PB95-963312-NDZ). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: 
Bioremediation (EPA 542-R-95-002, PB95-182911). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Fact 
Sheet and Order Form (EPA 542-F-95-003); Four 
Document Set (PB95-182903). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: 
Groundwater Treatment (EPA 542-R-95-003, 
PB95-182929). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Soil 
Vapor Extraction (EPA 542-R-95-004, PB95-182937). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Case Studies: Thermal 
Desorption, Soil Washing, and In Situ Vitrification 
(EPA 542-R-95-005, PB95-182945). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Remediation Technologies Screening 


Matrix and Reference Guide, Second Edition 
(PB95-104782; Fact Sheet: EPA 542-F-95-002). 
Federal Remediation Technology Roundtable. Also 
see Internet: http://www.frtr.gov/matrix/top-page.html. 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Removal of PCBs from 
Contaminated Soil Using the Cf Systems (trade name) 
Solvent Extraction Process: A Treatability Study 
(EPA 540-R-95-505, PB95-199030); Project Summary 
(EPA 540-SR-95-505). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Review of Mathematical Modeling 
for Evaluating Soil Vapor Extraction Systems (EPA 
540-R-95-513, PB95-243051). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Selected Alternative and Innovative 
Treatment Technologies for Corrective Action and 
Site Remediation: A Bibliography of EPA Information 
Resources (EPA 542-B-95-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. SITE Emerging Technology Program 
(EPA 540-F-95-502). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) 
Enhancement Technology Resource Guide Air 
Sparging, Bioventing, Fracturing, Thermal 
Enhancements (EPA 542-B-95-003). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Soil Vapor Extraction 
Implementation Experiences (OSWER Publication 
9200.5-223FS, EPA 540-F-95-030, PB95-963315). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Surfactant Injection for Ground 
Water Remediation: State Regulators' Perspectives 
and Experiences (EPA 542-R-95-011, PB96-164546). 

U.S. EPA. 1995. Symposium on Bioremediation of 
Hazardous Wastes: Research, Development, and Field 
Evaluations, Abstracts: Rye Town Hilton, Rye Brook, 
New York, August 8-10, 1995 (EPA 600-R-95-078). 

U.S. EPA. 1993-1995. Technology Resource Guides:. 

Bioremediation Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-93-004) 

Groundwater Treatment Technology Resource Guide 
(EPA 542-B-94-009, PB95-138657) 

Physical/Chemical Treatment Technology Resource 
Guide (EPA 542-B-94-008, PB95-138665) 

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Enhancement 
Technology Resource Guide: Air Sparging, 
Bioventing, Fracturing, and Thermal Enhancements 
(EPA 542-B-95-003) 

Soil Vapor Extraction (SVE) Treatment Technology 
Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-007) 


75 


U.S. EPA. 1995. Waste Vitrification Through Electric 
Melting, Ferro Corporation: Emerging Technology 
Bulletin (EPA 540-F-95-503). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Accessing EPA's Environmental 
Technology Programs (EPA 542-F-94-005). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Bioremediation: A Video Primer 
(video) (EPA 510-V-94-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Bioremediation in the Field Search 
System (EPA 540-F-95-507; Fact Sheet: EPA 
540-F-94-506). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Contaminants and Remedial Options 
at Solvent-Contaminated Sites (EPA 600-R-94-203, 
PB95-177200). 

U.S. EPA. 1990-1994. EPA Engineering Bulletins:. 

Chemical Dehalogenation Treatment: APEG 
Treatment (EPA 540-2-90-015, PB91-228031) 

Chemical Oxidation Treatment (EPA 540-2-91-025) 

In Situ Biodegradation Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-502, 
PB94-190469) 

In Situ Soil Flushing (EPA 540-2-91-021) 

In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment (EPA 
540-2-91-006, PB91-228072) 

In Situ Steam Extraction Treatment (EPA 
540-2-91-005, PB91-228064) 

In Situ Vitrification Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-504, 
PB95-125499) 

Mobile/Transportable Incineration Treatment (EPA 
540-2-90-014) 

Pyrolysis Treatment (EPA 540-S-92-010) 

Rotating Biological Contactors (EPA 540-S-92-007) 

Slurry Biodegradation (EPA 540-2-90-016, 
PB91-228049) 

Soil Washing Treatment (EPA 540-2-90-017, 
PB91-228056) 

Solidification/Stabilization of Organics and Inorganics 
(EPA 540-S-92-015) 

Solvent Extraction Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-503, 
PB94-190477) 

Supercritical Water Oxidation (EPA 540-S-92-006) 

Technology Preselection Data Requirements (EPA 
540-S-92-009) 


Thermal Desorption Treatment (EPA 540-S-94-501, 
PB94-160603) 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Field Investigation of Effectiveness 
of Soil Vapor Extraction Technology (Final Project 
Report) (EPA 600-R-94-142, PB94-205531). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Ground Water Treatment 
Technologies Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-009, 
PB95-138657). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. How to Evaluate Alternative Cleanup 
Technologies for Underground Storage Tank Sites: A 
Guide for Corrective Action Plan Reviewers (EPA 
510-B-94-003, S/N 055-000-004994); Pamphlet (EPA 
510-F-95-003). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. In Situ Steam Enhanced Recovery 
Process, Hughes Environmental Systems, Inc.: 
Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 
540-R-94-510, PB95-271854); Site Technology 

Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-510a, PB95-270476). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. In Situ Vitrification, Geosafe 
Corporation: Innovative Technology Evaluation 
Report (EPA 540-R-94-520, PB95-213245); 

Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-94-520). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. J.R. Simplot Ex-Situ Bioremediation 
Technology for Treatment of Dinoseb-Contaminated 
Soils: Innovative Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 
540-R-94-508); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-94-508). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Literature Review Summary of 
Metals Extraction Processes Used to Remove Lead 
From Soils, Project Summary (EPA 600-SR-94-006). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Northeast Remediation Marketplace: 
Business Opportunities for Innovative Technologies 
(Summary Proceedings) (EPA 542-R-94-001, 
PB94-154770). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Physical/Chemical Treatment 
Technology Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-008, 
PB95-138665). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Profile of Innovative Technologies 
and Vendors for Waste Site Remediation (EPA 
542-R-94-002, PB95-138418). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Radio Frequency Heating, KAI 
Technologies, Inc.: Innovative Technology Evaluation 
Report (EPA 540-R-94-528); Site Technology Capsule 
(EPA 540-R-94-528a, PB95-249454). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Regional Market Opportunities for 


76 


Innovative Site Clean-up Technologies: Middle 
Atlantic States (EPA 542-R-95-010, PB96-121637). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Rocky Mountain Remediation 
Marketplace: Business Opportunities for Innovative 
Technologies (Summary Proceedings) (EPA 
542-R-94-006, PB95-173738). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Selected EPA Products and 
Assistance On Alternative Cleanup Technologies 
(Includes Remediation Guidance Documents Produced 
By The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources) 
(EPA 510-E-94-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Soil Vapor Extraction Treatment 
Technology Resource Guide (EPA 542-B-94-007). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Solid Oxygen Source for 
Bioremediation Subsurface Soils (revised) (EPA 
600-J-94495, PB95-155149). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Solvent Extraction: Engineering 
Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-503, PB94-190477). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Solvent Extraction Treatment 
System, Terra-Kleen Response Group, Inc. (EPA 
540-MR-94-521). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Status Reports on In Situ Treatment 
Technology Demonstration and Applications:. 

Altering Chemical Conditions (EPA 542-K-94-008) 

Cosolvents (EPA 542-K-94-006) 

Electrokinetics (EPA 542-K-94-007) 

Hydraulic and Pneumatic Fracturing (EPA 
542-K-94-005) 

Surfactant Enhancements (EPA 542-K-94-003) 

Thermal Enhancements (EPA 542-K-94-009) 

Treatment Walls (EPA 542-K-94-004) 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Subsurface Volatization and 
Ventilation System (SVVS): Innovative Technology 
Report (EPA 540-R-94-529, PB96-116488); Site 
Technology Capsule (EPA 540-R-94-529a, 
PB95-256111). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Superfund Innovative Technology 
Evaluation (SITE) Program: Technology Profiles, 
Seventh Edition (EPA 540-R-94-526, PB95-183919). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption System, 
Maxymillian Technologies, Inc.: Site Technology 
Capsule (EPA 540-R94-507a, PB95-122800). 


U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption Treatment: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-501, 
PB94-160603). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Desorption Unit, Eco Logic 
International, Inc.: Application Analysis Report (EPA 
540-AR-94-504). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. Thermal Enhancements: Innovative 
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 542-K-94-009). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. The Use of Cationic Surfactants to 
Modify Aquifer Materials to Reduce the Mobility of 
Hydrophobic Organic Compounds (EPA 
600-S-94-002, PB95-111951). 

U.S. EPA. 1994. West Coast Remediation 
Marketplace: Business Opportunities for Innovative 
Technologies (Summary Proceedings) (EPA 
542-R-94-008, PB95-143319). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Accutech Pneumatic Fracturing 
Extraction and Hot Gas Injection, Phase I: Technology 
Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-93-509, 
PB93-216596). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Augmented In Situ Subsurface 
Bioremediation Process, Bio-Rem, Inc.: 
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-527). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Biogenesis Soil Washing 
Technology: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-93-510). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Bioremediation Resource Guide and 
Matrix (EPA 542-B-93-004, PB94-112307). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Bioremediation: Using the Land 
Treatment Concept (EPA 600-R-93-164, 
PB94-107927). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Fungal Treatment Technology: 
Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-93-514). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Gas-Phase Chemical Reduction 
Process, Eco Logic International Inc. (EPA 
540-R-93-522, PB95-100251, EPA 540-MR-93-522). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. HRUBOUT, Hrubetz Environmental 
Services: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-93-524). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Hydraulic Fracturing of 
Contaminated Soil, U.S. EPA: Innovative Technology 
Evaluation Report (EPA 540-R-93-505, 
PB94-100161); Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-93-505). 


77 


U.S. EPA. 1993. HYPERVENTILATE: A software 
Guidance System Created for Vapor Extraction 
Systems for Apple Macintosh and IBM 
PC-Compatible Computers (UST #107) (EPA 
510-F-93-001); User's Manual (Macintosh disk 
included) (UST #102) (EPA 500-CB-92-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of 
Contaminated Ground Water (EPA 540-S-92-003, 
PB92-224336). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of 
Contaminated Unsaturated Subsurface Soils 
(EPA-S-93-501, PB93-234565). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Bioremediation of Ground 
Water and Geological Material: A Review of 
Technologies (EPA 600-SR-93-124, PB93-215564). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. In Situ Treatments of Contaminated 
Groundwater: An Inventory of Research and Field 
Demonstrations and Strategies for Improving 
Groundwater Remediation Technologies (EPA 
500-K-93-001, PB93-193720). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Laboratory Story on the Use of Hot 
Water to Recover Light Oily Wastes from Sands (EPA 
600-R-93-021, PB93-167906). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Low Temperature Thermal Aeration 
(LTTA) System, Smith Environmental Technologies 
Corp.: Applications Analysis Report (EPA 
540-AR-93-504); Site Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-93-504). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Mission Statement: Federal 
Remediation Technologies Roundtable (EPA 
542-F-93-006). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Mobile Volume Reduction Unit, U.S. 
EPA: Applications Analysis Report (EPA 
540-AR-93-508, PB94-130275). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Overview of UST Remediation 
Options (EPA 510-F-93-029). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Soil Recycling Treatment, Toronto 
Harbour Commissioners (EPA 540-AR-93-517, 
PB94-124674). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. Synopses of Federal Demonstrations 
of Innovative Site Remediation Technologies, Third 
Edition (EPA 542-B-93-009, PB94-144565). 

U.S. EPA. 1993. XTRAX Model 200 Thermal 
Desorption System, OHM Remediation Services 
Corp.: Site Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 


540-MR-93-502). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Aostra Soil-tech Anaerobic Thermal 
Process, Soiltech ATP Systems: Demonstration 
Bulletin (EPA 540-MR-92-008). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Basic Extractive Sludge Treatment 
(B.E.S.T.) Solvent Extraction System, 
Ionics/Resources Conservation Co.: Applications 
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-079, 
PB94-105434); Demonstration Summary (EPA 
540-SR-92-079). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Bioremediation Case Studies: An 
Analysis of Vendor Supplied Data (EPA 
600-R-92-043, PB92-232339). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Bioremediation Field Initiative (EPA 
540-F-92-012). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Carver Greenfield Process, 
Dehydrotech Corporation: Applications Analysis 
Report (EPA 540-AR-92-002, PB93-101152); 

Demonstration Summary (EPA 540-SR-92-002). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Chemical Enhancements to 
Pump-and-Treat Remediation (EPA 540-S-92-001, 
PB92-180074). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Cyclone Furnace Vitrification 
Technology, Babcock and Wilcox: Applications 
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-017, 
PB93-122315). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Evaluation of Soil Venting 
Application (EPA 540-S-92-004, PB92-235605). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Excavation Techniques and Foam 
Suppression Methods, McColl Superfund Site, U.S. 
EPA: Applications Analysis Report (EPA 
540-AR-92-015, PB93-100121). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. In Situ Biodegradation Treatment: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-S-94-502, 
PB94-190469). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Low Temperature Thermal 
Treatment System, Roy F. Weston, Inc.: Applications 
Analysis Report (EPA 540-AR-92-019, 
PB94-124047). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Proceedings of the Symposium on 
Soil Venting (EPA 600-R-92-174, PB93-122323). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Soil/Sediment Washing System, 
Bergman USA: Demonstration Bulletin (EPA 
540-MR-92-075). 


78 


U.S. EPA. 1992. TCE Removal From Contaminated 
Soil and Groundwater (EPA 540-S-92-002, 
PB92-224104). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Technology Alternatives for the 
Remediation of PCB-Contaminated Soil and Sediment 
(EPA 540-S-93-506). 

U.S. EPA. 1992. Workshop on Removal, Recovery, 
Treatment, and Disposal of Arsenic and Mercury 
(EPA 600-R-92-105, PB92-216944). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Biological Remediation of 
Contaminated Sediments, With Special Emphasis on 
the Great Lakes: Report of a Workshop (EPA 
600-9-91-001). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Debris Washing System, RREL. 
Technology Evaluation Report (EPA 540-5-91-006, 
PB91-231456). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Guide to Discharging CERCLA 
Aqueous Wastes to Publicly Owned Treatment Works 
(9330.2-13FS). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. In Situ Soil Vapor Extraction: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-2-91-006, 
PB91-228072). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. In Situ Steam Extraction: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-2-91-005, 
PB91-228064). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. In Situ Vapor Extraction and Steam 
Vacuum Stripping, AWD Technologies (EPA 
540-A5-91-002, PB92-218379). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Pilot-Scale Demonstration of 
Slurry-Phase Biological Reactor for 
Creosote-Contaminated Soil (EPA 540-A5-91-009, 
PB94-124039). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Slurry Biodegradation, International 
Technology Corporation (EPA 540-MR-91-009). 

U.S. EPA. 1991. Understanding Bioremediation: A 
Guidebook for Citizens (EPA 540-2-91-002, 
PB93-205870). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Anaerobic Biotransformation of 
Contaminants in the Subsurface (EPA 600-M-90-024, 
PB91-240549). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Chemical Dehalogenation Treatment, 
APEG Treatment: Engineering Bulletin (EPA 
540-2-90-015, PB91-228031). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Enhanced Bioremediation Utilizing 


Hydrogen Peroxide as a Supplemental Source of 
Oxygen: A Laboratory and Field Study (EPA 
600-2-90-006, PB90-183435). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Guide to Selecting Superfund 
Remedial Actions (9355.0-27FS). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Slurry Biodegradation: Engineering 
Bulletin (EPA 540-2-90-016, PB91-228049). 

U.S. EPA. 1990. Soil Washing Treatment: 
Engineering Bulletin (EPA 540-2-90-017, 
PB91-228056). 

U.S. EPA. 1989. Facilitated Transport (EPA 
540-4-89-003, PB91-133256). 

U.S. EPA. 1989. Guide on Remedial Actions for 
Contaminated Ground Water (9283.1-02FS). 

U.S. EPA. 1987. Compendium of Costs of Remedial 
Technologies at Hazardous Waste Sites (EPA 
600-2-87-087). 

U.S. EPA. 1987. Data Quality Objectives for 
Remedial Response Activities: Development Process 
(9355.0-07B). 

U.S. EPA. 1986. Costs of Remedial Actions at 
Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites 
(EP A/640/2-86/03 7). 

U.S. EPA. N.D. Alternative Treatment Technology 
Information Center (ATTIC) (The ATTIC data base 
can be accessed by modem at (703) 908-2138). 

U.S. EPA. N.D. Clean Up Information (CLU-IN) 
Bulletin Board System. (CLU-IN can be accessed by 
modem at (301) 589-8366 or by the Internet at 
http://clu-in.com). 

U.S. EPA. N.D. Initiatives to Promote Innovative 
Technology in Waste Management Programs 
(OSWER Directive 9308.0-25). 

U.S. EPA and University of Pittsburgh. N.D. Ground 
Water Remediation Technologies Analysis Center. 
Internet address: http://www.gwrtac.org 

Vendor Information System for Innovative Treatment 
Technologies (VISITT), Version 4.0 (VISITT can be 
downloaded from the Internet at 
http://www.prcemi.com/visitt or from the CLU-IN 
Web site at http://clu-in.com). 


79 






















































































































&EPA 

United States 
Environmental Protection 
Agency 


Please make all necessary changes on the below label, 
detach or copy, and return to the address in the upper 
left-hand corner. 

If you do not wish to receive these reports CHECK HEReD ; 
detach, or copy this cover, and return to the address in the 
upper left-hand corner. 


PRESORTED STANDARD 
POSTAGE & FEES PAID 
EPA 

PERMIT No. G-35 


National Risk Management 
Research Laboratory 
Cincinnati, OH 45268 

Official Business 
Penalty for Private Use 
$300 


LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0 010 052 495 8 


EPA/625/R-02/007 
July 2002 

















































































